PJM demand down… AGAIN
August 17th, 2009
From WSJ article below, the chart says it all…
Another great Wall Street Journal article came out, again noting that demand is DOWN, DOWN, DOWN. This is pretty important given the massive infrastructure rush by the utilities. It’s showing what we’ve known all along, the 800 lb. gorilla in the corner that could/should stop any new infrastructure buildout.
Rebecca Smith, Wall Street Journal, wrote this piece, published last week:
Here’s the PJM Report it’s based on:
There are some choice snippets in the WSJ article, such as:
On Friday, the nation’s largest wholesale power market serving parts of
13 states east of the Rockies is expected to report that electricity
demand fell 4.4% in the first half of the year. That helped to push
down spot market prices by 40% during the first half of this year.
… and…
The price declines in this market, which extends from Delaware to
Michigan, come on top of a 2.7% drop in energy use in 2008 over 2007.
… and…
Power demand in Texas is down 3.2% so far this year due to business
contraction and reductions in employment which are causing many
households to economize.
… and …
But the flagging economy has resulted in a slump in demand that has jolted some energy markets. American Electric Power Co. and Southern Co., for example, both reported double-digit drops in industrial electricity use for the past quarter.
… and…
“There’s more supply than demand and prices are really low so it
doesn’t make sense to build anything,” says John Shelk, president of
the Electric Power Supply Association in Washington, D.C., a group that
represents power generators.
Once more with feeling… SUSQUEHANNA-ROSELAND TRANSMISSION IS NOT NEEDED!
7th Circuit tosses out FERC & PJM cost apportionment
August 13th, 2009
I was a big Posner fan in law school, mostly because he was so much fun to pick on, I so hate the “Chicago school.” But here’s another Posner, doing good! It’s a hilarious opinion, all the better because it so clearly tells FERC and PJM what to do with their rate shifting cost apportionment. GO POSNER!
Here’s the decision:
Two issues in this case:
1) PJM/FERC pricing based on marginal cost v. pricing including sunk costs. That one went for PJM/FERC, and American Electric and others lost in just a few paragraphs.
2) Where the action is — Ohio and Illinois Commissions objected to the 500+kV cost allocation on a pro rata basis, that “their rats should be raised by a uniform amount sufficient to defray the facilities’ costs.”
What’s particularly interesting to me is that this is all about “Project Mountaineer,” which PJM doesn’t even want to acknowledge exists! the Susquehanna-Roseland line that I’m working against is the NE part of line 1, and the MAPP line through now “just” a part of Delaware is the NE part of the southern line, line 4. Here’s the magnitude of Project Mountaineer – the Susquehanna-Roseland line is QUAD 500kV plus double circuiting the existing 230kV line, that’s one big project:
FYI, in the Cudahy dissent, he did some digging, and there is a Project Mountaineer tootnote quoting PJM stating that Project Mountaineer “would bring about substantial congestion relief and reliability improvements increasing Midwest-to-east transfers by 5,000 MW.” See Ventyx, Major Transmission Constraints in PJM (2007).
A quick sidebar… FYI, from Delaware Electric Cooperative 2009 Energy Plan – “CONFIDENTIAL”, arguing for the MAPP transmission project…
… and they report that transmission congestion is down 75% to 275 hours ANNUALLY! Really… so for that 275 hours we should build the $1.2 MAPP project? HOW STUPID DO YOU THINK WE ARE?
OK, back to Posners 7th Circuit decision. It was PJM’s idea, approved by FERC, to hit up all the utilities, and Illinois, a BIG example of the problem, would have had to pay out some $480 million while not receiving one dime of benefit. PJM used the theory that, well, PJM used to do it this way all the time before in massive infrastructure buildouts, but as Posner reminded them, that was then and this is now, PJM is a lot different now, Illinois wasn’t even part of the picture.
Posner was pissed off that there was no data at all to support their desired allocation, no data, no specifics about difficulties in assessing benefits, no lawsuits about inequities, no particulars, “[n]ot even the roughest estimate of likely benefits to the objecting utilities… oh yes, he let them have it… for page after page… and notes that FERC “brief devotes only five pages to the 500kV pricing issue.” FERC seems to presume a similar brainwashing in the courts that they and utilities presume of Commissions and legislatures, one that I see to often, that frantic claim of URGENT need, ‘WE’RE GOING TO FREEZE IN THE DARK IN AN INCUBATOR WITHOUT A JOB” theory, presented despite documented long term decrease in demand across the country. Once more with feeling, HOW STUPID DO YOU THINK WE ARE?
Oh, these guys irritate me. Anyway, check out this decision and consider the impact on all the 500kV and above projects applied for or waiting in the wings.
California – looking at DG as xmsn alternative
July 27th, 2009
Let’s hear it for California!
They’re getting the message — transmission is not needed and transmission is not wanted. If they try to push it through on the landowners across the state, well, they’re in trouble. And so they did a study of what’s necessary to accomplish their Renewable Energy Standard and here it is.
Here’s a statement from p. 10 of the Executive Summary that leads me to think they’re on the right path — just the simple recognition of this point:
California IOUs are currently on a procurement path that in effect prioritizes long-term market transformation over other policy objectives.
Here’s the full report:
And here’s a Power Point that hits the highlights:
TANC is tanking, two more cities withdraw
July 14th, 2009
Just heard from Lisa Goza, of Stop TANC, that Modesto and Turlock dropped out, following SMUD’s withdrawal last week. That’s supposedly 70% of the $$$$ for the project — gone! Redding is hanging in there, but the STOP TANC crew is on them and… well… maybe tomorrow morning at the TANC board meeting, they’ll give it up, throw in the towel, and tank TANC. It’s so close…
This group is amazing, so many people spread out over such a great distance, and they’re so wildly diverse, united against this obscene project built on lies — they’ve exposed the TANC project for what it is, and it is falling… this is a case study in how to organize for impact.
Soon… it’s time for the silver stake!
Yolo supervisors reject transmission power lines
By LIZETH CAZARES/Lcazares@dailydemocrat.com
Created: 07/14/2009 03:49:59 PM PDT
Two more players drop out of TANC proposal
Greetings from California and the TANC line
July 8th, 2009
Working on tanking the TANC line — proposed by TANC, WAPA, et al — unbelievable what they’re trying to do here. The short version is at StopTANC and on this map:
More later, in the meantime, here are some photos from the scene of the crime:
We had a hoot yesterday, bouncing around in the mountains on 4 wheel trails looking at transmission, chauffered by a “fellow” truckdriver, and in the jump seat, another transmission fighter with a German Shepherd Dog! Yes, we are having fun.