Xcel’s “forward sale agreement”
August 5th, 2010
Xcel is trading a bunch of paper for a bunch of money, 21,850,000 pieces of paper to be precise. How much money is that? Seems to be $469,775,000, or $408,500,000, gross, or $396,245,000 net to Xcel, depending on what numbers you look at, or what they sell at!
What will they do with it? According to the prospectus, and an article written about it:
“Xcel Energy intends to use any net proceeds that it receives upon settlement of the forward sale agreement described above, or from the sale of any shares to the underwriters to cover over-allotments, to repay outstanding commercial paper and make capital contributions to its operating subsidiaries.”
Here’s an article from Marketwatch:
Doesn’t this have the feel that they’re desperate for cash flow? We know they can’t get their construction capital to build the Brookings transmission line, and they’re hot to trot both about PUC ordained rate recovery, which they did not get and their Motion for Reconsideration (PUC Docket 09-1048) went nowhere.
Here’s Seeking Alpha’s Xcel 2Q Earnings Call Transcript!
Seeking Alpha Xcel 2Q Earnings Call Question & Answer
And a choice answer snippet from the Q&A:
Xcel’s Hiawatha Project Brief & Transcripts
June 21st, 2010
Xcel Energy, or Northern States Power, whichever, has filed its brief in the Routing docket for the Hiawatha Transmission Project.
Also filed is Notice that the transcripts are now available at local libraries, a big help because the cost is prohibitive, they’re not free here as they are in WI or available via FOIA as they are in New Jersey (called OPRA there):
Which states:
I write to advise that the transcripts for the evidentiary hearings held in the Hiawatha Transmission Project routing proceeding on April 12 – 21 and April 26 – 30, 2010, have been placed in the following libraries: East Lake Library, Hosmer Library, Franklin Library, Central Library, and Roosevelt Library. We have also provided an extra copy to the Central Library with a request that it forward it to the Nokomis Branch once renovations are complete. The transmittal documents are enclosed.
So those of you writing briefs now know where to go!!!!
Terrorist activity and electric infrastructure?
April 24th, 2010
Xcel Energy”s Hiawatha Transmission Project is sticking in my craw again. I’m having one of those “Xcel is evil” kind of days. Xcel is hiding reliability information under a claim of “Security.” How absurd can they get? Don’t they get that if I was going to blow up substations, a) I don’t need their stupid info to do it, and b) I would have done it a long time ago? Earth to Mars, that’s not my M.O. But noooooooooo…
I’ve been looking at Xcel’s SAIDI, SAIFI and CAIDI distribution reliability reports, one of the things I’m happiest about in the 2001 legislative session. Minn. Stat. 216B.029. Why? Because Xcel’s Scott Zima testified at the public hearing for the Hiawatha Transmission Line Project that the claimed “reliability” problems did not show up in their SAIDI, SAIFI and CAIDI reports. WAS ANYONE LISTENING?
What is SAIDI, SAIFI and CAIDI? They’re distribution reliability indices. Here are definitions stolen from Rochester Public Utilities 2009 Electric System Engineering & Operations Report:
- SYSTEM AVERAGE INTERRUPTION DURATION INDEX – SAIDI
SAIDI is defined as the average duration of interruptions for customers served during a specified time period. Although similar to CAIDI, the average number of customers served is used instead of number of customers affected.
The unit of SAIDI is minutes. A common usage of SAIDI is: “If all the customers on the distribution system were without power the same amount of time, they would have been out for _________ minutes”.
- SYSTEM AVERAGE INTERRUPTION FREQUENCY INDEX – SAIFI
SAIFI described the average number of times that a customer’s power is interrupted during a specified time period. “SAIFI-short” is calculated using the number of customers affected by momentary interruptions (such as brief breaker or recloser operations). “SAIFI-long” is calculated using the number of customers affected by sustained interruptions.
The units for SAIFI are “interruptions per customer”. A common usage of SAIFI is: “On the average, customers on the distribution system experienced _______ interruptions”.
- CUSTOMER AVERAGE INTERRUPTION DURATION INDEX – CAIDI
CAIDI is the weighted average length of an interruption for customers affected during a specified time period.
The unit of CAIDI is minutes. A common usage of CAIDI is: “The average customer that experiences an outage on the distribution system is out for ___________ minutes.”
Here’s some background info about SAIDI, SAIFI and CAIDI reports from Edison Institute:
Here’s the Minnesota rule about reporting SAIDI, SAIFI and CAIDI:
7826.0500 RELIABILITY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS.
Xcel has to file these reports annually. And since Xcel’s Mr. Zima’s testimony that the reliability problems they claim as the basis for need for the Hiawatha Project are NOT reflected in the SAIDI, SAIFI and CAIDI reports (WAS ANYONE LISTENING?), I spent some time looking at the annual reports filed this year:
Xcel’s Initial Filing – Docket 10-310
Xcel’s Initial Filing – Docket 10-310 – Attachment D – Part 1
Xcel’s Initial Filing – Docket 10-310 – Attachment D – Part 2
And there’s another older docket where similar information was recently filed:
Xcel’s Annual Filing – 02-2034 – Part 1
To search these dockets,go to www.puc.state.mn.us and click on “Search eDockets” and then plug in the docket numbers.
And here’s an example of what’s wrong with this picture – look at the crudely whited-out Feeder Line column:
Who cares? Well, I do… why? Because when they say that the distribution system is such a problem that they need a big honkin’ shiny new transmission line, and then one of their engineers testifies that this distribution “reliability problem” they’re whining about and inflicting an oversized transmission “solution” on a community about ISN’T showing up in the SAIDI, SAIFI and CAIDI distribution reliability reports, that’s a problem. IS ANYONE TRACKING THIS? It’s not rocket science, it’s basic vetting of their claims!
Looking at their letter in the filing in Docket 02-2034, there’s this amazing statement:
Security Data
The raw reliability data provided with this filing includes “security data” as
defined by Minn. Stat. § 13.37, subd. 1(a). Xcel Energy believes that some of the
raw data on the disks and/or that has been eFiled could be manipulated to reveal
the location and size of certain facilities that have been summarized in the
Monthly Report. The public disclosure or use of this information creates an
unacceptable risk that those who want to disrupt the electrical grid for political
or other reasons may learn which facilities to target to create the greatest
disruption. For this reason, pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 13.37, subd. 2, we have
excised this data from the public version of our filing.p. 5, Xcel’s Annual Filing – 02-2034 – Part I (emphasis added).
Excuuuuuse me?
The public disclosure or use of this information creates an unacceptable risk that those who want to disrupt the electrical grid for political or other reasons may learn which facilities to target to create the greatest disruption.
What a load o’ crap. It is so illogical — those they’re having problems with aren’t necessarily, and probably just AREN’T, the ones to target to create the greatest disruption!
So I calls up Xcel, I do… and leave a message with Bria Shea because Jody Londo who signed the cover letter with the “Security” note was not in, explaining what info in what dockets I’m looking for and that I’m wanting to sign a confidentiality agreement to get it.
But noooooooooooo, guess again. I get a call back from someone in “Legal” (I didn’t know they had an Illegal department) and here they are making a bogus argument about PUBLIC disclosure, and I’m asking for disclosure with a confidentiality agreement. She wants to know if I’m a party, which I’m not, there are no parties in these dockets. And even if a party, even with a confidentiality agreement, no, because it’s a SECURITY issue. Oh, yeah… right… I’m a terrorist, wanting their “feeder line” information to take out electricity to some select target… Guess she’s been talking to Mike Krikava, thinking only a terrorist would want to enter a 2005-MAPP map into a transmission proceeding. That’s as wacky as a judge thinking it’s appropriate to do a transmission proceeding without a map entered in as evidence!
So now I get to “evaluate my options.” It’s possible to do some triangulation with the reports and with the Attachments to Xcel’s Hiawatha Project Application, but… sigh… we all know what their concern is — that someone might read it and make some sense of it, and understand what it means.
Hiawatha Transmission Project public hearings
April 6th, 2010
What’s most disturbing about this project is that it’s just a small part of something much bigger that is laid out in the 2007 Biennial Transmission Plan, in their studies, stretching from a new “Cleveland” 345kV substation and line to the new “Hiawatha” substation, and from there, a 115kV line to the “new” Oakland/Midtown substation and down to a new “Penn Lake” substation (I remember one on Penn and 62 decades ago) and then to Wilson, which they admit had been recently upgraded and there’s room for expansion.
Here’s two pages of Chapter 7 of the 2007 Biennial Transmission Plan regarding this part of the world:
Plus they admit that the Hiawatha substation is planned with 50MVA transformers and room/plans for two more! Tripling capacity, at Hiawatha, to 150MVA. At Oakland, there’s “only” room for one more, the first is 70MVA and the expansion room/plan is for one more 70MVA, totaling 140 MVA.
From the Xcel Application, a chart regarding Land Use Trends:
Let’s see… what uses more electricity, Industrial (anyone remember Minneapolis Moline?) or Residential? Honeywell or Wells Fargo Mortgage?
Look what they’re using as their basis:
July 2006??? This is from their Hiawatha Application, Appendix D3, the South Minneapolis Electric Distribution Delivery System Long Term Study:
(Can’t get it now — says file is damaged)
Having looked through their studies, I don’t see any reason to not upgrade the distribution system and see where that leaves us, given that we’re in this depression.
Xcel – say it ain’t April Fools
April 2nd, 2010
From our friends in Colorado with this note:
A full copy of the spoof letter and press release are available at: www.xcelresponsiblebynature.com
(Website taken down on April 1, 2010 after complaint from Xcel…)
April 1, 2010
Denver, CO – On April Fools’ Day – as part of the international ‘Fossil Fools Day’ – Colorado activists pulled an elaborate prank on Xcel Energy, the largest utility company in the state. With a farce website (www.xcelresponsiblebynature.com), a satirical press release, and a letter to Colorado ratepayers, activists helped Xcel Energy become a renewable energy leader. The announcement said that Xcel Energy would switch to 100% renewable electricity in Colorado by phasing out all coal plants and abandoning plans to convert existing coal plants to natural gas.
In the spoof initiative, Xcel Energy agreed to pay for the transition to renewable energy out of its own deep pockets. The letter assured Colorado ratepayers: “While, over the past several years, we have raised rates for our customers numerous times, our new approach will put the burden on Xcel’s executives rather than our loyal and hardworking customers. And, rest assured, we can afford it. With an annual profit of nearly $700 million and CEO pay in the millions each year, our ‘responsible by nature’ executives are volunteering to take pay cuts to ensure the success of our plan.”
The press release was sent to a wide variety of media outlets, including business and financial journals around the country. In addition, the press release was sent to politicians and public agencies throughout Colorado, as well as to to various fossil fools, including coal and gas companies and lobby groups such as Americans for Clean Coal Electricity, to remind them which way the wind is blowing.
Beyond that, activists throughout the state distributed thousands of copies of a “letter from Xcel” to ratepayers and renewable energy companies, who were encouraged to email Xcel Energy’s Board of Directors to thank them for their “bold renewable energy proposal.”
The press release was sent out by “Simon Grunwasch.” Grunwasch is German for “greenwash,” indicating that Xcel Energy is masking its environmentally destructive reliance on fossil fuels behind a public image that emphasizes renewable energy. Currently, 90% of the company’s electricity in Colorado is generated by fossil fuels and only 10% from renewable sources. However, this is not for a lack of wind, solar and geothermal capacity. Xcel has received 15,000MW of bids for renewable energy projects – more than double its peak demand – but has only accepted a small fraction.
Though the company has recently announced its support of legislation that would retire or modify three Front Range coal plants by 2017, it is simultaneously opening the Comanche 3 coal-fired power plant in Pueblo – the largest coal plant in the state. The lifetime emissions from operating Comanche 3 will overwhelm any savings from retiring Front Range coal plants a few years early. Worse still, these coal plants could be replaced with natural gas, which still emits roughly 60% as much CO2 as coal, in addition to methane – a highly potent greenhouse gas.
“While this spoof announcement is unfortunately nothing more than an April Fools’ Day joke, it is an honest representation of what Xcel Energy needs to do,” said ‘Simon Grunwasch.’ “Xcel Energy needs to stop raising rates on Coloradans to pay for new coal plants, expensive natural gas and perks for their executives. Instead, they need to invest their vast resources in renewable energy for Colorado.”
More information about Fossil Fools Day is available at: Fossilfoolsdayofaction.org
Wish it were true? Contact Xcel Energy’s Board of Directors at: boardofdirectors@xcelenergy.com