What do the Benson turkey shit burning plant, the HERC garbage burner, and a couple other plants have in common? The have Power Purchase Agreements that Xcel wants to get out of or modify in its favor. Funny how that works. These things were bad from the get to, make no economic sense except to those selling what little power is generated. Now, it appears that Xcel Energy (and therefore us, Xcel’s customers), is tired of being screwed and are not going to take it anymore!
What’s Xcel Energy’s view of these Petitions? To save money, of course, and it looks to be about $53.1 million annually.
These Petitions were filed just now by Xcel Energy:
With a $20 million kicker to the City of Benson, here’s what Xcel Energy plans to do, including demolition of the plant:
Next up? The Hennepin Energy Recovery Center (HERC) garbage burner:
The plan for HERC? Cut the PPA amount, by how much, we don’t know, it’s all “PROTECTED DATA” and top secret:
What does that mean for Hennepin County? The HERC garbage burner has never been a money maker, and has always been a money loser. So now what? Does it make any sense to keep it open, or is it time to shut it down? Allow me to rephrase… is there any reason to keep it open? Seems like this is a convenient time to close it. Neighbors Against The Burner, are you listening?
Next up? Pine Bend, another “waste-to-energy” garbage burner, and another PPA that Xcel Energy wants to terminate:
And about the Sherco site and moving part of Northern Metals operation to the Sherco site, and that’s not all they want to do:
The point of this Sherco Petition?
And last but not least, a sale of assets to Flint Hills:
Transmission inefficiency, pipeline pumping stations, now this?
June 29th, 2017
For years, for decades, I’ve been going on and on about the inefficiency of transmission, the electric system, and line losses ad nauseum. Y’all know that, if you’ve been paying attention. And here we are, back to discussing inefficiency in the electric system.
The SW MN 345 kV Transmission Lines (PUC Docket 01-1958) turned on line losses. After that close call, line losses were calculated and considered on a very different model, framing it as a percentage of THE ENTIRE EASTERN INTERCONNECT. So what’s a little loss of 0.1%, who cares… well, as a part of THE ENTIRE EASTERN INTERCONNECT, it adds up fast. Let me make this perfectly clear, transmission line loss is substantial. It’s particularly substantial when you’re talking about using transmission to ship lower capacity energy, like wind and solar. If you have long, hundreds of miles long, transmission lines, there’s not much, if any, of that energy that would find its way to its destination.
There’s a “Stakeholder Meeting” coming up:
Register here
Those words, “Stakeholder Meeting” get my attention, because just who is a stakeholder, who decides. I don’t recall getting this email, but thankfully a client who is regarded as a “Stakeholder” did, so I’ve signed up and will spend the time to show up and raise a few points.
Upcoming Stakeholder Meeting: Opportunities and Barriers to Utility Infrastructure Efficiency
Friday, July 28th from 8:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m.
Wilder Center – 451 Lexington Pkwy. N, Saint Paul, MN 55104
Register for this free public meeting
Meeting Details
An estimated 12-15% of the nation’s electricity production is consumed by generation auxiliary loads, transmission and distribution losses, and substation consumption. As such, there is significant potential to increase utility infrastructure efficiency by decreasing conversion losses, improving plant operations, and mitigating transmission and distribution losses throughout Minnesota’s electric grid.
The Minnesota Department of Commerce invites you to participate in a stakeholder meeting to explore opportunities and barriers to utility infrastructure efficiency projects, and to begin developing a framework to improve the overall generation, transmission, and distribution efficiency of Minnesota’s electric system.
Meeting attendees will hear from national and local experts and gain insight into how existing, new, and on-the-horizon utility infrastructure technologies can increase system efficiency, including:
- A presentation by the Electric Power Research Institute, highlighting innovative utility infrastructure efficiency projects and approaches from around the country.
- A presentation from Minnkota Power Cooperative, discussing lessons learned from implementing infrastructure efficiency projects in Minnesota.
- Information about next steps in the stakeholder engagement process, including a deeper-dive examination of supply-side efficiency policy issues.
Register here
tRump on Climate Change – Withdraw from Paris Accord
June 1st, 2017
Listening to him speak is painful. This idiot is talking about “Clean Coal.” Claims that the Paris Accord stops development of “Clean Coal.” DOH, IT’S THE ECONOMY STUPID!
He’s again blathering about 3-4% growth. Delusional.
The Paris Accord hamstrings America? The Paris Accord limits the American economy?
His points in the speech are insane. A load of covfefe!
Here are tRumpe’s talking points handed out prior to today’s announcement:
Reply Comments on Minn. R. Ch. 7849 & 7850
June 1st, 2017
At long last, the final round of Comments on the 5+ year long rulemaking have been filed. A five year long process to enact the changes consistent with legislation passed in 2005, 12 years ago. WHAT!?!?! Yes, that’s how long it’s taken. These are rules based on the Minnesota statutes for Certificate of Need (Minn. Stat. 216B.243) and the “Power Plant Siting Act” (Minn. Stat. Ch. 216E), which is transmission routing and power plant siting.
Here are the Reply Comments, and note there are very few:
Public Intervenors – No CapX 2020, U-CAN, North Route Group & Goodhue Wind Truth – FINAL_May 31 2017
McNamasra GWT Reply_20175-132415-01
Commerce EERA Reply_20175-132345-01
ITC Midwest_Reply_20175-132421-02
Next step — on the agenda at a future Public Utilities Commission meeting, where they’ll discuss changes, hopefully we’ll have oral argument of the parties and comments from the public, and then the rules are formally released to the public for public comment, a hearing before an Administrative Law Judge, and then back to the Commission for approval. Probably it will be August… given the public comment period and hearing, this will be at least a SIX YEAR PROCESS!
RCMP cleared in shooting of Site C dam activist
May 23rd, 2017
James McIntyre was shot outside an open house for a dam project, “Site C” for the dam. You know, those open houses they hold to tell the public what they’re going to do before they do it… There was an investigation of the shooting by Canada’s “Independent Investigations Office,” and I’d had an alert and checked now and then, particularly a year after the shooting, but didn’t find the articles on the IIO’s November release of information until yesterday! Here’s the report from the IIO:
Here are some press write ups:
Police ‘begged’ Site C activist to put down knife before shooting him, witness says
IIO clears RCMP in shooting of James McIntyre
RCMP officers cleared in shooting death of Site C protester in Dawson Creek
Look at the way the press framed this article:
RCMP officer cleared in shooting death of B.C. activist that sparked Anonymous revenge campaign
This shooting of McIntyre hit home for me because of my routine of going to the open houses and hanging out at the door, and I know so well how angry people get when there’s infrastructure proposed in their community, on their land. They published my LTE about this in the Alaska Highway News:
Here are my older posts about the shooting, including a video of the shooting by someone in the hotel who was looking out the window:
RCMP shoots hydro dam protester? Nope, misidentified!
James McIntyre ID’d as man shot by RCMP
It’s been a year since McIntyre was shot in BC