LOCKHEED MARTIN SPONSORS FREE ACCESS TO EXCLUSIVE CONTENT.

Vienna, Va.: Public Utilities Fortnightly magazine launched a new twice-monthly online resource today. Fortnightly’s Green Utility (http://greenutility.fortnightly.com) features content developed by Fortnightly’s editorial staff, focusing on renewable power generation technology, finance and regulatory policies in the United States and Canada. The new editorial resource is made possible with sponsorship support from Lockheed Martin.

Fortnightly’s Green Utility will feature exclusive articles, webcasts, intelligence and commentary, as well as special access to related articles from the archives of other publications at Public Utilities Reports Inc. — including Public Utilities Fortnightly, Fortnightly’s Spark and Utility Regulatory News.

“Green Utility will focus Fortnightly’s editorial analysis on the challenges and opportunities of building out North America’s renewable energy infrastructure,” said Michael T. Burr, Fortnightly’s Editor-in-Chief. “Fortnightly brings the world-class editorial expertise to look beyond the news and hype, and analyze renewable energy issues in a way no other publication does. Lockheed Martin’s support allows us to make this unique and objective analysis freely accessible online.”

Fortnightly’s Green Utility is part of Fortnightly.com’s growing inventory of online resources. In the past two years, Fortnightly.com launched two financial databases — the Utility ROE Database and the Transactions Database — providing data about utility ratemaking decisions and financial transactions, such as mergers, acquisitions and debt issues.

The March 1, 2011, installment of Fortnightly’s Green Utility, with a webcast and article developed by Fortnightly Contributing Editor Steven Andersen, features a conversation with tax-credit guru Keith Martin of Chadbourne & Parke. The second installment is scheduled for release on March 15.

PUBLIC UTILITIES FORTNIGHTLY (www.fortnightly.com), published by Public Utilities Reports Inc., in Vienna, Va., is the journal of record for the U.S. utility industry, providing authoritative, in-depth analysis of trends in generation, transmission and distribution of electricity and natural gas. For more than 80 years, Public Utilities Fortnightly has delivered exclusive interviews and expert analysis to help utility-industry executives and regulators decide where to invest, how the industry will be regulated and what the future holds. Subscription rate: $287/year.

Posted: March 1st, 2011 under IGCC, R&D, biomass, carbon regulation, climate change, efficiency, electric vehicles, geoengineering, green energy, offshore wind, regulation, renewable energy credits, renewables.
Comments: none

Stops short of approving permanent smart grid plan.

Courtesy of Utility Regulatory News #3997: In a general rate case proceeding in which it authorized Consumers Energy Co. to increase its electric rates by $145.7 million, the Michigan Public Service Commission deemed it reasonable for the utility to continue with those smart grid and advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) projects presently permitted under the utility’s AMI/smart grid pilot program. However, the commission refused to transform the pilot into a permanent program, finding that cost/benefit data from the trial run are not yet sufficient to support permanent deployment.

The commission said that although it has a “generally favorable” view of AMI and smart grid initiatives, it is concerned about the “staggering costs” imposed on ratepayers under such plans. The commission commented that it feared that AMI vendors ultimately will benefit more from the programs than will customers. The commission also remarked that it was aware of instances where the utility had forgone opportunities to collaborate with other companies in customizing AMI software, which efforts could have greatly reduced program costs. The commission stated that while its decision on whether to go forward with full deployment is not dependent on a formal cost/benefit analysis, Consumers Energy must provide documentation of the reasonableness of its pilot program costs.

Citing the questions it already has about the company’s efforts to minimize certain costs, the commission cautioned that there are no guarantees of full cost recovery. For the full story, subscribe to URN.

Posted: December 23rd, 2010 under Smart metering, dynamic pricing, efficiency, regulation, smart grid.
Comments: none

Fixed costs moved to separate charges

Courtesy of Utility Regulatory News #3998: Emphasizing the importance of separating system costs from commodity costs, the Indiana Utility Regulatory Commission has adopted a settlement agreement under which a natural gas local distribution company, Northern Indiana Public Service Co. (NIPSCO), is authorized to restructure its rate schedules in conjunction with a decrease in base rates. The settlement provides for an overall reduction in rates of $14.8 million and a 7% inflation-adjusted return on equity (ROE).

The commission explained that NIPSCO’s new rate design moves the recovery of all fixed costs to non-volumetric charges, such as the customer charge and the distribution charge. Describing the redesign as a “wholesale cultural change,” the commission said that the modified structure should motivate the company to expand its energy efficiency and conservation efforts. Additionally, the commission found that collecting fixed costs and commodity costs through separate charges will reduce the company’s operational risk, thus justifying the somewhat lower level of ROE than previously granted. For the full story, subscribe to URN.

Posted: December 23rd, 2010 under efficiency, regulation, revenue decoupling.
Comments: none

Mass. DPU delays decision on investments

 Weekly Update courtesy of Utility Regulatory News #3981: Pending receipt of more information about the marketing and evaluation elements of an electric utility’s plan for a smart grid pilot project, the Massachusetts Department of Public Utilities has postponed a decision on approving the plan. The plan was submitted jointly by Massachusetts Electric Co. and Nantucket Electric Co., both doing business as National Grid. The filing was made pursuant to a state law, the Green Communities Act, which requires every electric utility to develop a smart grid pilot program.

The project outline sponsored by National Grid was far more expansive than required by law, however. Whereas the statute called for a minimum of 0.25% of an electric utility’s customers to participate in any smart grid pilot, National Grid’s proposed program would include almost five times as many customers as necessary to meet the statutory threshold. Its smart grid plan also incorporated installation of more automation on its own distribution end of the grid than required.

Several parties took issue with the size, scope, and scale of the utility’s plan, arguing that the purpose of the pilots is to gather test data, for which such a large number of participants was not statistically necessary. The department, however, said that it saw no need to reduce the size, scope, or scale of National Grid’s pilot, averring that a larger-scale deployment of smart grid technologies could produce more accurate cost/benefit analyses of the technologies. Nevertheless, the department declined to approve the pilot as filed, finding that the project proposal was incomplete as to how the utility expected to carry out its associated marketing, education, and outreach functions and how it planned to evaluate the effectiveness of the program.

National Grid was given 90 days to provide the department with details on those two aspects of the project. Subscribe to URN for the full story.

Posted: August 13th, 2010 under Smart metering, dynamic pricing, efficiency, regulation, smart grid.
Comments: none

Excerpted from “Summer of Discontent,” Fortnightly’s August 2010 Frontlines column.

As America approaches summer’s Dog Days, the debate over smart meters is heating up. Utilities in at least four states are facing public backlash against smart-meter rollouts — and that’s not counting the class-action lawsuits previously filed against Oncor and Pacific Gas & Electric in Texas and Bakersfield, Calif., respectively.

NORTHERN CALIFORNIA: About 60 residents picketed offices of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) in San Francisco on July 20, carrying protest signs and chanting such slogans as, “One, two, three, four, smart meters no more.” The demonstrators voiced concerns about privacy and personal choice issues, as well as the meters’ radio-frequency transmissions and their possible effect on human health. Several local governments in Northern California, including Berkeley, Marin County, Santa Cruz and San Francisco, petitioned PG&E to stop its smart-meter rollout pending further public hearings and studies.

The Marin Independent Journal published an editorial on July 20 that stated, “Forcing your customers to do something without first making sure they are comfortable with it is not the best way to run a business.”

MARYLAND: Executives at Baltimore Gas & Electric were stunned when the Maryland Public Service Commission (PSC) decided in June to deny the company’s DOE-funded smart-grid investment plan. The decision came in the midst of a heated gubernatorial campaign, in which Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) is campaigning on a theme of green jobs, while former Gov. Robert Ehrlich (R) accuses the O’Malley administration of killing jobs with anti-business regulations. Against this backdrop, BGE petitioned for expedited re-hearing and amended its plan to address the PSC’s concerns—most notably by deferring and limiting BGE’s proposed capital-expense “tracker”; eliminating shareholder incentives for achieving demand-reduction targets; accelerating the depreciation of the new meters; making time-of-use rates voluntary instead of mandatory; and proposing a customer communication and education plan. The commission agreed to schedule hearings for early August.

OHIO: The Westerville city council voted in a meeting on July 20 to postpone a final vote on the municipal utility’s federal stimulus-funded smart-grid project. Chairman Mike Heyeck announced afterward that the postponement would allow the council to field questions and comments from Westerville residents, and to “provide additional opportunity to learn more about advanced metering” via a series of public events and outreach efforts.

The council’s decision came in the wake of growing public discontent, expressed at a July 6 city council meeting, where the residents who showed up spoke overwhelmingly against smart meters. ThisWeek newspaper quoted resident Charles Voight Jr. expressing outrage over the remote disconnection capabilities of smart meters, and the city’s decision to accept federal stimulus dollars. “This process seems to have been predetermined, with the grants being applied for without the public giving their full consent,” Voight reportedly said. “I personally will not let you into my home, remember that.”

Andy Boatright, electric utility manager for the city of Westerville, told Fortnightly in a phone interview that many of the 30-plus people who have expressed opposition to the project have focused on the federal government’s role. “I think it’s primarily a function of the federal grant,” Boatright said.

COLORADO: Xcel Energy awaits a decision by the Boulder city council on whether to recommend that voters renew Xcel’s utility franchise. That’s right; the celebrated Smart Grid City might actually walk away from its utility partner.

Xcel’s 20-year agreement expires at the end of 2010, and the utility wants Boulder to sign up for another 20 years. But surveys indicate voters would reject such an agreement, as well as an alternative plan that would impose an excise tax on Xcel—which the company would pass through to customers in monthly bills. Council members reportedly are considering municipalizing Boulder’s utility services if voters reject both initiatives.

Negative public sentiment over Xcel’s franchise agreement might be tied to the company’s Smart Grid City project, which has encountered its share of problems—from ballooning capital costs to disappointing participation in its demand-response program. Xcel CEO Dick Kelley told Fortnightly in June, “There’s huge value on the utility side of the meter, but it hasn’t been that successful on the customer side. I guess some people thought Boulder residents were super-environmentalists, but in fact they just want their TV to work and their beer to be cold when they get home.”-Michael T. Burr

Posted: July 22nd, 2010 under Smart metering, carbon regulation, climate change, dynamic pricing, efficiency, energy policy, green energy, regulation, renewables, smart grid.
Comments: 2