Author Archives Laura Arnold

CAC: What’s the true cost of Duke’s Edwardsport plant? IndianaDG: What’s Duke’s true “avoided cost” ?

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   June 23, 2013  /   Posted in Edwardsport IGCC Plant, Uncategorized  /   No Comments

IndianaDG wants to know if the cost of Duke Energy's Edwardsport IGCC plant should be used in determining Duke's "avoided cost" for cogeneration and alternative energy production. Each year Indiana's electric investor owned utilities file these rates with the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC).

In a recent White Paper  by Washington, D.C. attorney Carolyn Elefant entitled, REVIVING PURPA"S PURPOSE: The Limits of Existing State Avoided Cost Ratemaking Methodologies In Supporting Alternative Energy Development and a Proposed Path for Reform, she explains the history of "avoided cost" under PURPA:

"Because of the inability of independent power producers to sell their efficient and clean electricity into monopoly-controlled markets, Congress in 1978 enacted the Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA). PURPA encouraged the development of alternative power, including renewable energy and cogeneration by requiring utilities to purchase energy and capacity from qualifying facilities (QFs) at their incremental, or avoided costs."

"...this report undertook a comprehensive review...of the different ways by which state utility commissions calculate avoided cost rates for QF's under PURPA to identify the factors and underlying state policies that account for the board range of approaches."

"...the report found that many developers are unable to fully capitalize on PURPA's benefits in light of factors such as the complex, Byzantine nature of avoided cost ratemaing at the state level which makes avoided cost ratemaking difficult for developers and regulators to fully understand."

"This report concludes that PURPA can still serve as an important policy tool for development of small power producers, including renewables and CHP. However, states need additional guidance on which avoided cost methodologies are most favorable to small power producers as well as an understanding of the range of options--such as resource specific avoided cost rates and ability to account for avoided environmental costs--available to them in setting avoided cost rates."

Can you believe that Duke Energy Indiana claims their "avoided cost" is only $0.028541/kWh with a capacity payment of merely $7.05/kW/mo?

Do you agree with IndianaDG that we need to shed some light on both the formula contained in the Indiana Administration Code (170 IAC 4-4.1) as well as the specific inputs utilities are permitted to plug into this formula?

Step one is to determine the true cost of Duke Energy's Edwardsport plant and then step two is to use that cost information to recalculate Duke Energy's avoided costs.

Please join us in calling for a review of the IURC's avoided cost procedures. Contact me at Laura.Arnold@IndianaDG.net.

Laura Ann Arnold.

http://kokomotribune.com/opinion/x1912990109/KERWIN-OLSON-Whats-the-true-cost

June 21, 2013

KERWIN OLSON: What's the true cost?

Nearly $3B yet to be accounted for on Edwardsport plant.

Kokomo Tribune

---- — Now that Duke Energy’s Edwards-port coal gasification plant is allegedly “commercial” as of June 7, it’s once again time to set the record straight and fill in the blanks. For more than seven years now, Duke and the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission have conveniently left out information they prefer the public not be told, as perhaps the truth is too inconvenient.

Duke, along with the IURC, continues to perpetuate the myth that the plant will result in just a 14.5 percent rate increase. The reality is this 14.5 percent represents only a portion of the financing costs for the project. Additional financing costs of at least $320 million, as well as the actual construction costs currently capped at $2.595 billion, are not included.

That 14.5 percent only represents the approximately $665 million in construction-work-in-progress charges, or CWIP, a tracker or extra fee tacked onto the bill of captive Duke ratepayers. How much more will monthly bills increase after the other $3 billion is factored into rates? Ask Duke or the IURC … see if you can get a straight answer.

Duke is already collecting approximately $30 million per month from ratepayers just for financing costs. In fact, Duke ratepayers will pay more just for the financing charges for the Edwardsport fiasco than Indianapolis Power & Light is seeking in total for its proposed natural gas plant in Morgan County, a plant that will produce approximately the same amount of power.

Duke claims its construction costs are capped at $2.595 billion, but that isn’t accurate. Duke declared the plant “in-service” on June 7, which effectively marks the end of this so-called “cost cap” from the settlement. From this date forward, ratepayers can potentially be stuck with every dollar Duke spends on the plant, and there remains a lengthy “punch-list” of items that are yet to be completed. So, the settlement effectively exposes consumers to the potential of significant costs outside of the cap, which was intended to protect them.

Lastly, it needs to be understood that the IURC has declined to protect consumers from a white elephant by refusing to place any operational or performance requirements on the Edwardsport plant. Despite this plant being a first-of-its-kind technology, never built or operated at this scale anywhere in the world, if it doesn’t work or operates at less than the 85 percent capacity factor that Duke opined the plant will achieve, Duke ratepayers are stuck with the bill, no questions asked. As long as the plant runs for even a minute, Duke gets the full amount.

With Duke already collecting more than $30 million per month from customers for this plant, which is already two years behind schedule, Duke indicates it will be another 15 months before the plant is expected to have its “long-term level of availability” — whatever that means. Duke has been less than forthcoming every step of the way with this boondoggle … why should anyone believe them now?

Kerwin Olson is executive director of the Citizens Action Coalition. Contact him at kolson@citact.org.

 

 

NYT: Obama Readying Emissions Limits on Power Plants; Grist: Coming soon: An Obama climate strategy

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   June 20, 2013  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Are you ready to help President Obama with his new plan to battle climate change? Join IndianaDG in our efforts to battle climate change by supporting renewable energy and distributed generation.

By 
Published: June 19, 2013 494 Comments

WASHINGTON — President Obama is preparing regulations limiting carbon dioxide emissions from existing power plants, senior officials said Wednesday. The move would be the most consequential climate policy step he could take and one likely to provoke legal challenges from Republicans and some industries.

Electric power plants are the largest single source of global warming pollution in the country, responsible for nearly 40 percent of greenhouse gas emissions. With sweeping climate legislation effectively dead in Congress, the decision on existing power plants — which a 2007 Supreme Court decision gave to the executive branch — has been among the most closely watched of Mr. Obama’s second term.

The administration has already begun steps to restrict climate-altering emissions from any newly built power plants, but imposing carbon standards on the existing utility fleet would be vastly more costly and contentious.

The president is preparing to move soon because rules as complex as those applying to power plants can take years to complete. Experts say that if Mr. Obama hopes to have a new set of greenhouse gas standards for utilities in place before he leaves office he needs to begin before the end of this year.

Heather Zichal, the White House coordinator for energy and climate change, said Wednesday that the president would announce climate policy initiatives in coming weeks. Another official said a presidential address outlining the new policy, which will also include new initiatives on renewable power and energy efficiency, could come as early as next week.

Ms. Zichal said none of the initiatives being considered by the administration required legislative action or new financing from Congress.

In a speech in Berlin on Wednesday, Mr. Obama echoed his assertive talk on climate policy since his re-election, talk that some climate advocates have criticized as going beyond his actions.  He said the United States and the world had a moral imperative to take “bold action” to slow the warming of the planet.

“The grim alternative affects all nations — more severe storms, more famine and floods, new waves of refugees, coastlines that vanish, oceans that rise,” Mr. Obama said. “This is the global threat of our time.”

He added, “We have to get to work.”

Republicans criticize Mr. Obama’s climate policy as government overreach that is holding back the economy. Some Democrats, including those hawkish about climate action, also worry that tough new standards on power plants could slow job growth and raise energy costs, particularly in places like the industrial Midwest that depend on cheap power from coal.

But administration officials signaled that Mr. Obama had decided the risks from climate change outweighed the potential economic and political costs from taking steps to address it.

“He is serious about making it a second-term priority,” Ms. Zichal said at a forum Wednesday in Washington sponsored by The New Republic magazine. “He knows this is a legacy issue.”

Ms. Zichal suggested that a central part of the administration’s approach to dealing with climate change would be to use the authority given to the Environmental Protection Agency to address climate-altering pollutants from power plants under the Clean Air Act.

“The E.P.A. has been working very hard on rules that focus specifically on greenhouse gases from the coal sector,” she said. “They’re doing a lot of important work in that space.”

She did not specifically mention standards for existing power plants, but other senior officials have said in recent days that Mr. Obama has decided to start work on such regulations.

A 2007 Supreme Court decision gave the E.P.A. authority to regulate greenhouse gases, and it has already done so for vehicles. Environmental advocates said that addressing power plant pollution must be the centerpiece of any serious climate policy.

“To paraphrase Joe Biden, this is a big deal,” said Daniel F. Becker, director of the Safe Climate Campaign, an advocacy organization. “Nothing he can do will cut greenhouse gases more.”

Last year, the E.P.A. proposed greenhouse gas regulations for new power plants that would essentially ban the construction of any additional coal-fired plants. The administration was required to complete that regulation by mid-April, but it missed the deadline in a sign of the pitfalls of such complex rule making. The E.P.A. has not said when it expects to complete the rules.

The timing of the new policy on existing power plants is driven in large part by the timetables the Clean Air Act sets for a major rule-making. The law requires the agency to publish proposed guidelines. States are then required to submit plans for meeting the guidelines, which the agency must review and which the public must be allowed time to comment on.

“All of that takes time, and we’re in a race against time,” said Vickie Patton, general counsel at the Environmental Defense Fund.

Regulation of existing power plants is further complicated by the pending nomination of Gina McCarthy to become E.P.A. administrator. Ms. McCarthy has for the past four years run the agency’s office responsible for enforcing the Clean Air Act.

Senate Republicans are holding up her nomination over unrelated issues. Republicans and industry leaders also worry about her intentions on power plant regulation. In a carefully worded statement, she told committee members during her confirmation proceedings that the agency “is not currently developing” any such regulations.

The administration has been quietly stitching together a suite of global warming policy measures for the president to unveil this summer to make good on promises in his election night acceptance speech, his second Inaugural address and his State of the Union address.

Denis McDonough, the White House chief of staff, and his deputy, Rob Nabors, have regularly met with cabinet secretaries and their deputies to adapt to a changing climate and to propose new measures that do not require Congressional action.

Mr. Obama’s coming speech is also expected to highlight measures that the Department of Energy can take to make appliances and industrial equipment more efficient and to reduce the energy wasted in public and private buildings.

A version of this article appeared in print on June 20, 2013, on page A1 of the New York edition with the headline: Obama Readying Emissions Limits on Power Plants.

Permalink http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/20/science/earth/obama-preparing-big-effort-to-curb-climate-change.html?smid=pl-share

Coming soon: An Obama climate strategy

By Claire Thompson
Barack Obama

The White House His big, new climate plan is coming any day now.

Rumors have been swirlingthat President Obama soon plans to unveil major new efforts to combat climate change. And today, White House officials confirmed that the announcement is coming soon — probably next month, but maybe as early as next week.

At a Washington, D.C., forum sponsored by The New Republic, Heather Zichal, White House coordinator for energy and climate change, said the president planned to unveil new policy initiatives and is “serious about making [climate change] a second-term priority.” She declined to give details, but according to The New York Times …

Ms. Zichal suggested in her remarks that a central part of the administration’s approach to dealing with climate change would be to use the authority given to the Environmental Protection Agency to address climate-altering pollutants from power plants under the Clean Air Act. …

The electric power sector is responsible for about a third of the nation’s greenhouse gas emissions, and any serious effort to address climate change will require steps to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and other climate pollutants from coal-burning power plants.

The administration has already proposed regulations that would crack down on carbon pollution from new power plants, effectively barring them from burning coal. But those regulations are being delayed, reportedly to make them stand up better under court challenge. A number of states and green groups had threatened to sue over the delay, but this week they backed off, saying they’d wait to see what climate initiatives Obama actually does announce.

The next big step would be regulating emissions from existing power plants, which could lead to the shuttering of coal-fired facilities. Climate hawks have been pushing for this. Here’s David Roberts on the tactic back in December (emphasis his):

This chance to spur decarbonization in the power sector is Obama’s greatest second-term opportunity on climate change. How EPA designs and implements these rules will help define his legacy. There is nothing else with as much potential that does not require the imprimatur of intransigent minorities in Congress.

Though such regulations do not have to be approved by Congress to go into effect, they’re expected to be the target of legal challenges from industry groups, and of intense opposition from lawmakers aligned with industry or representing coal-dependent states. From The New York Times:

The issue of power plant regulation is sensitive because it will … put further stress on the coal industry, which is already suffering from a lack of demand as utilities switch to natural gas, which is cheaper.

More regulations and a death blow to coal — the GOP will love it!

Speaking of things the GOP loves (to hate), Obama’s climate plan will likely also include expanded renewable-energy development on public land and increased focus on energy efficiency in buildings and equipment.

 

NY increases net metering cap from 1% to 3%; Should Indiana increase its cap?

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   June 20, 2013  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments

Two years ago the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission (IURC) approved the cap on Indiana's net metering from 0.1% to 1%. The revised net metering rule made vast improvements but is it time to consider another round of improvements to the Indiana net metering rule. Many of us think another round of changes are needed to add:

  • third party net metering (via leasing and/or LLC's);
  • aggregate net metering;
  • community or group net metering; and
  • virtual net metering.

IndianaDG has reported on these net metering concepts previously.

Let me know if you are interested and willing to participate in creating a net metering 2.0 proposal for Indiana.

Laura Ann Arnold

Logo

STATE OF NEW YORK

Public Service Commission

               Garry A. Brown, Chairman

Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223
Further Details: James Denn
James.denn@dps.ny.gov 518.474.7080

                                                                    13035; 03-E-0188; 12-E-0485; 12-E-0486;                                                              12-E-0487; 12-E-0488; 12-E-0489; 12-E-0490

June 13, 2013

IMPROVEMENTS MADE TO RENEWABLE ENERGY PROGRAM

Changes to Renewable Energy Initiative Keeps Pace With NY Sun Requirements

In support of efforts to meet the goals set forth by Governor Cuomo in the NY-Sun initiative and other renewable energy programs, the Public Service Commission (Commission) today approved reallocating $32 million in funds from the Renewable Portfolio Standard (RPS) along with increasing net metering limits to accommodate the anticipated increase in demand as more solar projects are installed.   Under the NY-Sun initiative, launched by Governor Cuomo last year, the state adopted the goal of quadrupling in 2013, the amount of photovoltaic capacity installed during 2011. To advance this goal, Governor Cuomo proposed expanding the NY-Sun initiative to provide long-term funding of $150 million annually over the next 10 years ensuring the growth of the solar industry across the state.   “The State has seen an unprecedented amount of solar power that is being installed both by homeowners and businesses under Governor Cuomo’s critically important NY-Sun initiative,” said Commission Chairman Garry Brown. “The changes we approved today will help ensure that the phenomenal growth continues unabated.”   On April 5, 2013, NYSERDA filed a petition to shift $32 million in funds in the RPS competitive photovoltaic program under the NY-Sun initiative between certain regions to meet current market demand.   In another decision today, the Commission decided to increase each utility’s system-wide net metering limitations for photovoltaic projects, as well as farm anaerobic digestion, small hydro, micro combined heat and power, and fuel cells to three percent of the system peak load from the current one percent. The increase will make available sufficient net metering to accommodate the statewide solar photovoltaic installation goals of the NY-Sun initiative and the anticipated demand for net metering related to the other eligible technologies.   The change would apply to net metered projects in service territories of Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., New York State Electric and Gas Corporation, Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation, Orange and Rockland Utilities, Inc., and Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation. Central Hudson’s limit was increased to three percent in October of last year.   Since the Governor launched NY Sun in 2012, a total of 242 MW of solar photovoltaics have been installed or is under development, more than was installed in the entire prior decade.   Net metering is used by the electric utilities to measure and charge for the net electricity supplied by the utility and provided to it by a customer-generator, according to statutory requirements.  Under net metering, the owner of an eligible renewable energy facility receives retail credit for at least a portion of the electricity they generate.   The Commission’s decision today, when issued, may be obtained by going to the Commission Documents section of the Commission’s Web site at www.dps.ny.gov and entering Case Numbers 03-E-0188, 12-E-0485, 12-E-0486, 12-E-0487, 12-E-0488, 12-E-0489 and 12-E-0490 in the input box labeled "Search for Case/Matter Number." Many libraries offer free Internet access. Commission orders may also be obtained from the Commission’s Files Office, 14th floor, Three Empire State Plaza, Albany, NY 12223 (518-474-2500).  If you have difficulty with understanding English, please call us at 1-800-342-3377 for free language assistance services regarding this press release.
###

Webinar 7/2/13 on 2013 Texas Legislation and Its Impact on Combined Heat and Power (CHP); Good ideas for Indiana?

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   June 19, 2013  /   Posted in Uncategorized  /   No Comments
Dear IndianaDG Readers: 

The Indiana Distributed Energy Alliance supports state policies to promote combined heat & power (CHP) which is also called cogeneration. There are many here in Indiana who believe that CHP has been a step child to sexier renewable energy technologies such as solar PV and wind. Join this webinar to learn how new legislation in Texas impacts CHP and then let's try to figure out if we should try to get some similar policies enacted here in Indiana.

Laura Ann Arnold

 

The U.S. Department of Energy Gulf Coast Clean Energy Application Center continues its quarterly webinar series on the benefits and applications of combined heat and power (CHP).There is no cost to attend. CEUs are available upon request.


2013 Texas Legislative Session Recap - Emphasis on CHPTues., July 2, 10:00-11:00 a.m. CST 
The 83rd Texas Legislature passed several pieces of legislation that are expected to positively impact the state's CHP once signed into law. This webinar will provide a synopsis of the 2013 legislative session with an emphasis on CHP-related legislation, anticipated market impacts of new laws, and next steps for the CHP community. Legislation discussed will include:

  • HB 1864 - Authorizes the State Energy Conservation Office (SECO) to develop guidelines for how CHP is evaluated, as currently required by law, prior to the construction or renovation of government facilities deemed to be "critical" for emergency preparedness and emergency response operations.
  • HB 2049 - Changes current law so that cogeneration facilities can now sell electricity to purchasers of thermal energy, thereby maximizing operational efficiency and minimizing financial risk.
  • SB 385 - Refines the Property Assessed Clean Energy (PACE) long-term financing mechanism for the owner (or third-party owner) of CHP, waste heat recovery, and other energy-efficient and water-efficient technologies on commercial and industry property.

Guest speaker: Paul Cauduro, Executive Director, Texas CHP Initiative

 

Register here

 

U.S. DOE Gulf Coast Clean Energy Application Center
4800 Research Forest Drive; The Woodlands, Texas 77381
Website | E-mail

Goshen (IN) based Hertzler Systems Installs Solar PV and Sells Electricity to NIPSCO Using Feed-in tariff (FIT)

Posted by Laura Arnold  /   June 14, 2013  /   Posted in Feed-in Tariffs (FiT), Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPSCO)  /   No Comments

Hertzler Systems Inc. co-owners Byron Shetler (left) and Evan Miller display one of the nearly 50 solar panels used in the solar energy project at their Goshen, Indiana, headquarters. Shetler is Hertzler's Chief Technology Officer. Miller is President and CEO.

Hertzler Systems Inc. co-owners Byron Shetler (left) and Evan Miller display one of the solar panels used in the solar energy project. Shetler is Hertzler’s Chief Technology Officer. Miller is President and CEO.

updated: 6/14/2013 10:08:33 AM

Goshen Company Powers Up With Solar Panels

InsideINdianaBusiness.com Report

A Goshen-based company is planning to use solar energy to feed electricity directly into the Northern Indiana Public Service Co. grid. Hertzler Systems Inc. says it is in the final stages of installing nearly 50 solar panels at the Goshen operation. The company estimates that over 25 years, the impact of the investment will be the equivalent of planting 4.5 acres of trees.

June 14, 2013

News Release
GOSHEN, Ind. – Hertzler Systems Inc. has just made a substantial investment in reducing its carbon footprint through Northern Indiana Public Service Company’s (NIPSCO) Feed-in-Tariff program that “buys back” electrical power from customers that are generating their own clean energy.

Herztler is presently finishing the installation of 48 solar panels at its Goshen location that will feed electricity directly into NIPSCO’s power grid, generating an estimated 13,317 kWh per year and providing the equivalent of 44 percent of Hertzler’s current yearly electricity consumption.

The installing company estimates that over the next 25 years, the system will save 522,275 pounds of CO2 emissions, 1,676 pounds of smog-producing NOx, 1,517 pounds of acid rain-producing SOx, and 103 pounds of asthma-producing particulates. All of this is the equivalent of taking an average car off the road for 849,794 miles, or planting 4.5 acres of trees.

“Our investment is significant and the impact is significant,” said Evan Miller, president and CEO of Hertzler. NIPSCO also extends its clean energy buy back to wind and hydroelectric power, but pays the most, up to 30 cents per kWh, for solar power. By using more customer generated power, NIPSCO expects to slow its need to build new power plants to keep up with the increasing demand for electrical energy.

Hertzler Systems provides automated statistical process control (SPC) software for a wide variety of business and manufacturing concerns to improve the efficiency and cost-effectiveness of their operations and the quality of their products and services.

Miller noted the firm also filled some back-lot acreage four years ago with 550 trees, “creating a little woods” as part of its sustainability efforts. It also changed some of its lighting and expects to do more in that area to further reduce energy needs.

Miller called the solar panels “a good long-term investment and a way to reduce our carbon footprint, since we use a lot of electricity and do a fair amount of travel.”

“We’re serious about these efforts and we’ve put money into them because we’re part of an economy that is contributing to the warming of the planet. We have some responsibility to do something about it. We’re a leader in our field of expertise and we want to be a leader in this way too.”

Hertzler Systems has been a leader in Statistical Process Control, SPC software and Six Sigma for over 30 years and serves a diverse customer base in service, transactional and manufacturing environments. The company’s software and services enable clients to connect, collect, and analyze data, building a data infrastructure for making data-driven decisions. These capabilities help clients to reduce costs, cycle time and errors, and increase profitability. Visit www.hertzler.com

Source: Hertzler Systems

Copyright 2013 IndianaDG