Deregulation jolts Texas power bills

By Wall Street Journal


Electrical Testing & Commissioning of Power Systems

Our customized live online or in‑person group training can be delivered to your staff at your location.

  • Live Online
  • 12 hours Instructor-led
  • Group Training Available
Regular Price:
$599
Coupon Price:
$499
Reserve Your Seat Today
Texas had some of the cheapest power rates in the country when it zapped most of the state's electric regulations six years ago, convinced that rollicking competition would drive prices even lower.

This summer, electricity there is some of the nation's priciest.

Power costs are rising in the rest of the U.S., but everything is bigger in Texas: On a hot day in May, wholesale prices rose briefly to more than $4 a kilowatt hour - about 40 times the national average.

"We could end up doubling last year's power prices," says Dan Jones, who monitors the market for the Texas Public Utility Commission to make sure it functions efficiently and is free of manipulation. A Texan shopping for electricity today typically would be quoted a price between 13 and 27 cents a kilowatt hour; the national average is between nine and 10 cents.

Beset by a combination of soaring natural-gas prices for power generators and congested transmission lines that weren't designed to accommodate the new freewheeling market, officials are struggling to figure out what can be done to bring prices back down in a state that consumes more electricity than any other.

"Are my constituents going to be screaming bloody murder in August?" state Rep. Will Hartnett, whose district includes parts of North Dallas, asked at a recent legislative hearing on the electricity market. "I'm worried about what's about to hit us."

Prices in Texas have risen since the industry was freed from regulation, but these recent increases have been quite a shock for America's most audacious experiment in deregulating electric power. Five retail companies that sell electricity to homeowners and small-businesspeople have failed. That has left customers facing unexpectedly high bills when they are quietly and seamlessly switched to other, more-expensive retailers.

Large corporations that buy electricity wholesale from power plants haven't fared any better. A state that once touted its plentiful power sources to energy-intensive industries such as chemical plants and refineries is now seeing "manufacturers look at Georgia and Alabama and see prices that are half what we're paying in Texas," says Tony Bennett, chairman of the Texas Association of Manufacturers.

Still, there is little momentum for big changes. Many Texas officials believe that their system - lots of elbow room and few binding rules - will work out best for consumers in the long run. "The system is working the way it is supposed to work," says state Rep. Phil King, the Republican from Weatherford who is chairman of the House Regulated Industries Committee.

As the nation grapples with the fallout from soaring energy prices, Texas's deregulation roller-coaster offers an example of how a well-intentioned policy can reap unintended consequences. Structuring electricity markets to guarantee both steady supplies and reasonable prices remains one of the biggest challenges for policy makers. Yet deregulation, which has worked with industries as diverse as telecommunications and airlines, hasn't worked as well for electricity.

Some economists argue that power markets pose a special challenge because electricity can't be stored and must be supplied at a moment's notice around the clock, which sometimes gives sellers more leverage than buyers. When California tried to deregulate its electricity market, it stumbled into an energy crisis that bankrupted its biggest utility.

Not long ago, Texas thought it had the answer. When then-Gov. George W. Bush signed the state's deregulation bill in 1999, he assured that "competition in the electric industry will benefit Texans by reducing monthly rates and offering consumers more choices." The law, which took effect in 2002, left few restrictions on what power generators could charge and what consumers could pay.

The utility commission gradually relinquished the authority to set electricity prices in about 75% of the state - those areas not covered by municipal power departments, rural cooperatives or investor-owned companies that were better connected with neighboring states. Competition would govern them.

As part of the plan, utilities couldn't continue to operate as a vertically integrated whole, generating, transmitting and selling power to captive customers. Divisions were spun off or organized into operating units of holding companies.

The specter of having competitors for the first time spurred power-plant owners to modernize. The newest plants are about a third more efficient than the ones they are replacing. What didn't change much is the mix of fuels used to make electricity: Gas still accounts for about half of the state's power generation, compared with about 20% for the U.S. as a whole.

That seemed like a good idea as Texas has plenty of gas and it burns more cleanly than coal. But gas prices are about five times the level they were in 2002, and about twice what they were a year ago. When natural gas rises, the bounce is felt instantly in power prices across the state because wholesale electricity prices are pegged to natural-gas costs. Even power generated from nuclear fission, wind or coal is priced as if it were coming from natural gas because of its dominant position in the Texas marketplace.

Another part of the deregulation plan was encouraging the creation of a slew of retailers that would buy power wholesale from generators and then sell it to businesses and homes. To promote choice, the state intentionally set low requirements, allowing retailers to open up shop with as little $100,000 in capital.

The state soon had nearly 100 retailers, giving Texans more choices than consumers anywhere else in the U.S. - from plans that offered fixed prices to ones that fluctuated with the market. Some retailers tried to lure customers with gimmicks like free golf balls; others offered clean energy from wind turbines.

Bob Zlotnik, co-founder of StarTex Power, had a previous career as a promoter of tractor pulls and rock concerts. He says people came to the business from all walks of life, and not all were prepared. "I'm not sure people know how to assess all the risks" of a deregulated market, says Mr. Zlotnik, whose wife and partner has experience in deregulated power and telecommunications. It's hard for the public to know just how savvy a retailer is.

Things become especially hairy when retailers have to buy electricity on the state's daily spot market - a daily exchange where power is bought and sold. Most retailers try to sign long-term deals with generators to get the power they need. But at times, demand jumps, and retailers need to buy extra power on the spot market.

Larry Kelly, chief operating officer for retailer Texas Power L.P., says that spot-market prices have spiked so much that he raised his prices to between 18 cents and 22 cents a kilowatt hour for electricity, up from about 12 cents last year.

Some retailers report they've had difficulty finding suppliers willing to sign long-term deals to sell them power, raising suspicions that generating companies may be intentionally forcing retailers to get supplies through the expensive daily auction. Generating companies deny this, and Mr. Jones, the utility commission's market monitor, says he's looking into the matter.

Already, high spot-market prices have pushed five electricity retailers, serving about 45,000 customers, into default. More defaults are possible because many retailers are small companies working on thin margins. When retailers go under, customers' lights stay on as their accounts are switched automatically to "providers of last resort" - nearly always with higher rates. Many customers don't find out about it until their next bill.

John Dreese, an aeronautical engineer in Fort Worth, heard his power supplier, National Power Co., had gone bust in May and began shopping for a replacement. Before he could ink a deal, he was automatically switched to TXU Energy, a unit of Energy Future Holdings Corp. of Dallas, formerly TXU Corp. His price jumped 71% overnight, to 18.8 cents a kilowatt hour from 11 cents.

"No way was I going to pay that," says Mr. Dreese. He was able to shop the market and switch to another retailer for 13.3 cents a kilowatt hour.

Mr. Dreese says he lived in California during its energy crisis and has a sense of déjà vu. "I don't think the promise of deregulation can ever be reached," he says. "You just add a lot of middlemen."

Like homeowners unaware of the risks of an adjustable-rate mortgage, some consumers didn't realize how wildly their bills could vary if they chose plans tied to the market. Steve Schwantes, a Round Rock resident who was laid off last winter from his job as a finance manager at Dell Inc., just got his June utility bill and expected it to be similar to his May bill for $189. Instead, it was $488.

"I was completely shocked," he says. His electricity provider raised its prices twice in a single billing cycle, jacking up his cost by 47% to 18.7 cents a kilowatt hour. Hot weather meant he used more electricity to cool his two-story home. He's now closing off part of the house and has found a cheaper plan.

Large customers aren't immune to making bad bets in the deregulated marketplace. Alcoa Inc. got into trouble at its Rockdale aluminum smelter when a nearby power plant it had been relying on began breaking down. The provider, Luminant, a unit of Energy Future Holdings, offered power from other sources but at 16 cents a kilowatt hour instead of the 3.8 cents that Alcoa had been paying. Alcoa opted to take a chance and buy power off the spot market, instead.

It was the wrong move. It sometimes had to pay $2 to $4 a kilowatt hour for electricity. "There are days we've lost millions of dollars," says Alcoa spokesman Kevin Lowery in Pittsburgh. It estimates the toll from lower output and higher costs will top $44 million. "You can't run a business that way," Mr. Lowery says.

The company recently announced that it was cutting 250 of its 900 workers and halving its output in Rockdale.

Luminant says it tried to help Alcoa, but "we told them we couldn't offer a below-market price," says Lisa Singleton, company spokeswoman.

Texas intentionally designed its system to allow for wide price swings. State officials believe that occasional spikes entice companies to build more power plants and transmission lines. Next year, the maximum price generators will be able to seek in the spot market will jump to $3,000 a megawatt hour, or $3 a kilowatt hour, from the current $2,250, or $2.25 per kilowatt hour. Most other deregulated markets in the U.S. have a maximum price of $1,000.

But one of the problems plaguing Texas is that it is still using an electricity grid that was designed to support the old regional power giants, not a dynamic statewide market.

Often, the cheapest power to produce - say, from wind farms in West Texas - can't reach the buyers that might need it most, such as office buildings in Houston. That's because the grid - like a poorly designed freeway - doesn't have enough capacity to move power easily around the state.

Each day, the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, or Ercot - created by the state to operate the grid and the daily power auctions - runs congestion-management software that helps it figure out which plants' electricity to buy. It pays extra money to some plants to run more than they'd proposed, and it pays others to run less.

For reasons that are still not well understood, the mismatch has worsened this summer. The incidence of congestion jumped 270% this May over May 2007. As a result, spot-market prices, at times, have gotten as high as $4,000 a megawatt hour, actually exceeding the price cap of $2,250 a megawatt hour because of the incentive payments.

Mr. Jones, the market monitor, says Ercot has tweaked its software to do a better job holding down prices.

Some power companies have found ways to make a bundle off congestion.

Suez Energy Marketing NA, a division of Paris-based Suez SA, owns a tiny 70-megawatt plant near Houston. On days of high demand, Suez says it offers 60 megawatts at $170 a megawatt hour, a price low enough to guarantee Ercot will ask it to run. Then it offers the final 10 megawatts at the maximum price allowed, $2,250 a megawatt hour.

In Texas's deregulated market, that means if Suez can sell more than 60 megawatts, it can charge the $2,250 rate not just for the last 10 megawatts, but for all the power from the plant.

At that rate, Suez collects $157,500 an hour to run the plant, versus the $12,000 an hour it would get if it priced everything at $170 a megawatt hour.

John Henderson, senior vice president of generation for Suez, says the plant can make a decent return if it garners that $2,250 price at least 15 hours a year. "In this business," explains Mr. Henderson, "you have feast years and you have famine years." He acknowledges that 2008 is shaping up to be a feast year.

The practice is reminiscent of one that played a role in the meltdown of California's electricity market earlier this decade. Afterwards, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission prohibited "hockey-stick bidding," named because a graph of the bid structure makes it look like a hockey stick standing on its blade. The deregulated Texas market, because it has no major connection to other states' grids, is not subject to FERC rules.

Suez spokesman Rob Minter says his firm doesn't practice hockey-stick bidding but uses a rational strategy to operate the plant profitably under the law.

Texas plans to make improvements to its electricity market which officials say will help ease the recent transmission congestion and, hopefully, bring prices down. Early next year, Ercot plans to roll out a new $325 million computer system that will change the way it handles congestion. California has been working on a similar system for seven years and is still not done.

The grid operator also will add a new energy auction for power intended to be delivered the next day instead of on the current day like the spot market, something it hopes will bring more orderliness to the market.

State officials say Texas has gone too far to turn back now. "I don't think we can put the toothpaste back in the tube," says Mr. King, the state representative. "All we can do is go forward."

Related News

Ontario's electricity 'recovery rate' could lead to higher hydro bills

Ontario Hydro Flat Rate sets a single electricity rate at 12.8 cents per kWh, replacing time-of-use pricing for Ontario ratepayers, affecting hydro bills this summer, alongside COVID-19 Energy Assistance Program support.

 

Key Points

A fixed 12.8 cents per kWh electricity price replacing time-of-use rates across Ontario from June to November.

✅ Single rate applies 24/7, replacing time-of-use pricing

✅ May slightly raise bills versus pre-pandemic usage patterns

✅ COVID-19 aid offers one-time credits for households, small firms

 

A new provincial COVID-19 measure, including a fixed COVID-19 hydro rate designed to give Ontario ratepayers "stability" on their hydro bills this summer, could result in slightly higher hydro costs over the next four months.

Ontario Premier Doug Ford's government announced over the weekend that consumers would be charged a single around-the-clock electricity rate between June and November, before a Nov. 1 rate increase takes effect, replacing the much-derided time-of-use model ratepayers have complained about for years.

Instead of being charged between 10 to 20 cents per kilowatt hour, depending on the time of day electricity is used, including ultra-low TOU rates during off-peak hours, hydro users will be charged a blanket rate of 12.8 cents per kWh.

"The new rate will simply show up on your bill," Premier Doug Ford said at a Monday afternoon news conference.

While the government said the new fixed rate would give customers "greater flexibility" to use their home appliances without having to wait for the cheapest rate -- and has tabled legislation to lower rates as part of its broader plan -- the new policy also effectively erases a pandemic-related hydro discount for millions of consumers.

For example, a pre-pandemic bill of $59.90 with time-of-use rates, will now cost $60.28 with the government's new recovery rate, as fixed pricing ends across the province, before delivery charges, rebates and taxes.

That same bill would have been much cheaper -- $47.57 -- if the government continued applying the lowest tier of time-of-use 24/7 under an off-peak price freeze as it had been doing since March 24.

The government also introduced support for electric bills with two new assistance programs to help customers struggling to pay their bills.

The COVID-19 Energy Assistance Program will provide a one-time payment consumers to help pay off electricity debt incurred during the pandemic -- which will cost the government $9 million.

The government will spend another $8 million to provide similar assistance to small businesses hit hard by the pandemic.

 

Related News

View more

Washington State Ferries' Hybrid-Electric Upgrade

Washington State Hybrid-Electric Ferries advance green maritime transit with battery-diesel propulsion, lower emissions, and fleet modernization, integrating charging infrastructure and reliable operations across WSF routes to meet climate goals and reduce fuel consumption.

 

Key Points

New WSF vessels using diesel-battery propulsion to cut emissions, improve efficiency, and sustain reliable ferry service.

✅ Hybrid diesel-battery propulsion reduces fuel use and CO2

✅ Larger vessels with efficient batteries and charging upgrades

✅ Compatible with WSF docks, maintenance, and safety standards

 

Washington State is embarking on an ambitious update to its ferry fleet, introducing hybrid-electric boats that represent a significant leap toward greener and more sustainable transportation. The state’s updated plans reflect a commitment to reducing carbon emissions and enhancing environmental stewardship while maintaining the efficiency and reliability of its vital ferry services.

The Washington State Ferries (WSF) system, one of the largest in the world, has long been a critical component of the state’s transportation network, linking various islands and coastal communities with the mainland. Traditionally powered by diesel engines, the ferries are responsible for significant greenhouse gas emissions. In response to growing environmental concerns and legislative pressure, WSF is now turning to hybrid-electric technology similar to battery-electric high-speed ferries seen elsewhere to modernize its fleet and reduce its carbon footprint.

The updated plans for the hybrid-electric boats build on earlier efforts to introduce cleaner technologies into the ferry system. The new designs incorporate advanced hybrid-electric propulsion systems that combine traditional diesel engines with electric batteries. This hybrid approach allows the ferries to operate on electric power during certain segments of their routes, reducing reliance on diesel fuel and cutting emissions as electric ships on the B.C. coast have demonstrated during similar operations.

One of the key features of the updated plans is the inclusion of larger and more capable hybrid-electric ferries, echoing BC Ferries hybrid ships now entering service in the region. These vessels are designed to handle the demanding operational requirements of the Washington State Ferries system while significantly reducing environmental impact. The new boats will be equipped with state-of-the-art battery systems that can store and utilize electric power more efficiently, leading to improved fuel economy and lower overall emissions.

The transition to hybrid-electric ferries is driven by both environmental and economic considerations. On the environmental side, the move aligns with Washington State’s broader goals to combat climate change and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, including programs like electric vehicle rebate program that encourage cleaner travel across the state. The state has set ambitious targets for reducing carbon emissions across various sectors, and upgrading the ferry fleet is a crucial component of achieving these goals.

From an economic perspective, hybrid-electric ferries offer the potential for long-term cost savings. Although the initial investment in new technology can be substantial, with financing models like CIB support for B.C. electric ferries helping spur adoption and reduce barriers for agencies, the reduced fuel consumption and lower maintenance costs associated with hybrid-electric systems are expected to lead to significant savings over the lifespan of the vessels. Additionally, the introduction of greener technology aligns with public expectations for more sustainable transportation options.

The updated plans also emphasize the importance of integrating hybrid-electric technology with existing infrastructure. Washington State Ferries is working to ensure that the new vessels are compatible with current docking facilities and maintenance practices. This involves updating docking systems, as seen with Kootenay Lake electric-ready ferry preparations, to accommodate the specific needs of hybrid-electric ferries and training personnel to handle the new technology.

Public response to the hybrid-electric ferry initiative has been largely positive, with many residents and environmental advocates expressing support for the move towards greener transportation. The new boats are seen as a tangible step toward reducing the environmental impact of one of the state’s most iconic transportation services. The project also highlights Washington State’s commitment to innovation and leadership in sustainable transportation, alongside global examples like Berlin's electric flying ferry that push the envelope in maritime transit.

However, the transition to hybrid-electric ferries is not without its challenges. Implementing new technology requires careful planning and coordination, including addressing potential technical issues and ensuring that the vessels meet all safety and operational standards. Additionally, there may be logistical challenges associated with integrating the new ferries into the existing fleet and managing the transition without disrupting service.

Despite these challenges, the updated plans for hybrid-electric boats represent a significant advancement in Washington State’s efforts to modernize its transportation system. The initiative reflects a growing trend among transportation agencies to embrace sustainable technologies and address the environmental impact of traditional transportation methods.

In summary, Washington State’s updated plans for hybrid-electric ferries mark a crucial step towards a more sustainable and environmentally friendly transportation network. By incorporating advanced hybrid-electric technology, the state aims to reduce carbon emissions, improve fuel efficiency, and align with its broader climate goals. While challenges remain, the initiative demonstrates a commitment to innovation and underscores the importance of transitioning to greener technologies in the quest for a more sustainable future.

 

Related News

View more

Duke solar solicitation nearly 6x over-subscribed

Duke Energy Carolinas Solar RFP draws 3.9 GW of utility-scale bids, oversubscribed in DEP and DEC, below avoided cost rates, minimal battery storage, strict PPA terms, and interconnection challenges across North and South Carolina.

 

Key Points

Utility-scale solar procurement in DEC and DEP, evaluated against avoided cost, with few storage bids and PPA terms.

✅ 3.9 GW bids for 680 MW; DEP most oversubscribed

✅ Most projects 7-80 MWac; few include battery storage

✅ Bids must price below 20-year avoided cost estimate

 

Last week the independent administrator for Duke’s 680 MW solar solicitation revealed data about the projects which have bid in response to the offer, showing a massive amount of interest in the opportunity.

Overall, 18 individuals submitted bids for projects in Duke Energy Carolinas (DEC) territory and 10 in Duke Energy Progress (DEP), with a total of more than 3.9 GW of proposals – more nearly 6x the available volume. DEP was relatively more over-subscribed, with 1.2 GWac of projects vying for only 80 MW of available capacity.

This is despite a requirement that such projects come in below the estimate of Duke’s avoided cost for the next 20 years, and amid changes in solar compensation that could affect project economics. Individual projects varied in capacity from 7-80 MWac, with most coming within the upper portion of that range.

These bids will be evaluated in the spring of 2019, and as Duke Energy Renewables continues to expand its portfolio, Duke Energy Communications Manager Randy Wheeless says he expects the plants to come online in a year or two.

 

Lack of storage

Despite recent trends in affordable batteries, of the 78 bids that came in only four included integrated battery storage. Tyler Norris, Cypress Creek Renewables’ market lead for North Carolina, says that this reflects that the methodology used is not properly valuing storage.

“The lack of storage in these bids is a missed opportunity for the state, and it reflects a poorly designed avoided cost rate structure that improperly values storage resources, commercially unreasonable PPA provisions, and unfavorable interconnection treatment toward independent storage,” Norris told pv magazine.

“We’re hopeful that these issues will be addressed in the second RFP tranche and in the current regulatory proceedings on avoided cost and state interconnection standards and grid upgrades across the region.”

 

Limited volume for North Carolina?

Another curious feature of the bids is that nearly the same volume of solar has been proposed for South Carolina as North Carolina – despite this solicitation being in response to a North Carolina law and ongoing legal disputes such as a church solar case that challenged the state’s monopoly model.

 

Related News

View more

Elon Musk could help rebuild Puerto Rico with solar-powered electricity grid

Puerto Rico Tesla Solar Power enables resilient microgrids using batteries, renewable energy, and energy storage to rebuild the hurricane-damaged grid, reduce fossil fuels, cut costs, and accelerate recovery with scalable solar-plus-storage solutions.

 

Key Points

A solar-plus-storage plan using Tesla microgrids and batteries to restore Puerto Rico's cleaner, resilient power.

✅ Microgrids cut diesel reliance and harden critical facilities.

✅ Batteries stabilize the grid and shave peak demand costs.

✅ Scalable solar enables faster, modular disaster recovery.

 

Puerto Rico’s governor Ricardo Rossello has said that he will speak to Elon Musk after the Tesla inventor said his innovative solar and battery systems could be used to restore electricity on the island.

Mr Musk was mentioned in a tweet, referencing an article discussing ways to restore Puerto Rico’s power grid, which was knocked out by Hurricane Maria on September 20.

Restoring the ageing and already-weakened network has proved slow: as of Friday 90 per cent of the island remained without power. The island’s electricity company was declared bankrupt in July.

Mr Musk was asked: “Could @ElonMusk go in and rebuild #PuertoRico’s electricity system with independent solar & battery systems?”

The South African entrepreneur replied: “The Tesla team has done this for many smaller islands around the world, but there is no scalability limit, so it can be done for Puerto Rico too.

“Such a decision would be in the hands of the PR govt, PUC, any commercial stakeholders and, most importantly, the people of PR.”

His suggestion was seized upon by Mr Rossello, who then tweeted: “@ElonMusk Let's talk. Do you want to show the world the power and scalability of your #TeslaTechnologies?

“PR could be that flagship project.”

Mr Musk replied that he was happy to talk.

Restoring power to the battered island is a priority for the government, and improving grid resilience remains critical, with hospitals still running on generators and the 3.5 million people struggling with a lack of refrigeration or air conditioning.

Radios broadcast messages advising people how to keep their insulin cool, and doctors are concerned about people not being able to access dialysis.

And, with its power grid wiped out, the Caribbean island could totally rethink the way it meets its energy needs, drawing on examples like a resilient school microgrid built locally. 

“This is an opportunity to completely transform the way electricity is generated in Puerto Rico and the federal government should support this,” said Judith Enck, the former administrator for the region with the environmental protection agency.

“They need a clean energy renewables plan and not spending hurricane money propping up the old fossil fuel infrastructure.”

Forty-seven per cent of Puerto Rico’s power needs were met by burning oil last year - a very expensive and outdated method of electricity generation. For the US as a whole, petroleum accounted for just 0.3 per cent of all electricity generated in 2016 even as the grid isn’t yet running on 100% renewable energy nationwide.

The majority of the rest of Puerto Rico’s energy came courtesy of coal and natural gas, with renewables, which later faced pandemic-related setbacks, accounting for only two per cent of electricity generation.

“In that time of extreme petroleum prices, the utility was borrowing money and buying oil in order to keep those plants operating,” said Luis Martinez, a lawyer at natural resources defense council and former special aide to the president of Puerto Rico’s environmental quality board.

“That precipitated the bankruptcy that followed. It was in pretty poor shape before the storm. Once the storm got there, it finished the job.”

But Mr Martinez told the website Earther that it might be difficult to secure the financing for rebuilding Puerto Rico with renewables from FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency) funds.

“A lot of distribution lines were on wood poles,” he said.

“Concrete would make them more resistant to winds, but that would potentially not be authorized under the use of FEMA funds.

"We’re looking into if some of those requirements can be waived so rebuilding can be more resilient.”

 

Related News

View more

With New Distributed Energy Rebate, Illinois Could Challenge New York in Utility Innovation

Illinois NextGrid redefines utility, customer, and provider roles with grid modernization, DER valuation, upfront rebates, net metering reform, and non-wires alternatives, leveraging rooftop solar, batteries, and performance signals to enhance reliability and efficiency.

 

Key Points

Illinois NextGrid is an ICC roadmap to value DER and modernize the grid with rebates and non-wires solutions.

✅ Upfront Value-of-DER rebates reward location, time, and performance.

✅ Locational DER reduce peak demand and defer wires and substations.

✅ Encourages non-wires alternatives and data-driven utility planning.

 

How does the electric utility fit in to a rapidly-evolving energy system? That’s what the Illinois Commerce Commission is trying to determine with its new effort, "NextGrid". Together, we’re rethinking the roles of the utility, the customer, and energy solution providers in a 21st-century digital grid landscape.

In some ways, NextGrid will follow in the footsteps of New York’s innovative Reforming the Energy Vision process, a multi-year effort to re-examine how electric utilities and customers interact. A new approach is essential to accelerating the adoption of clean energy technologies and building a smarter electricity infrastructure in the state.

Like REV, NextGrid is gaining national attention for stakeholder-driven processes to reveal new ways to value distributed energy resources (DER), like rooftop solar and batteries. New York and Illinois’ efforts also seek alternatives, such as virtual power plants, to simply building more and more wires, poles, and power plants to meet the energy needs of tomorrow.

Yet, Illinois is may go a few steps beyond New York, creating a comprehensive framework for utilities to measure how DER are making the grid smarter and more efficient. Here is what we know will happen so far.

On Wednesday, April 5, at the second annual Grid Modernization Forum in Chicago, I’ll be discussing why these provisions could change the future of our energy system, including insights on grid modernization affordability for stakeholders.

 

Value of distributed energy

The Illinois Commerce Commission’s NextGrid plans grew out of the recently-passed future energy jobs act, a landmark piece of climate and energy policy that was widely heralded as a bipartisan oddity in the age of Trump. The Future Energy Jobs Act will provide significant new investments in renewables and energy efficiency over the next 13 years, redefine the role and value of rooftop solar and batteries on the grid, and lead to significant greenhouse gas emission reductions.

NextGrid will likely start laying the groundwork for valuing distributed energy resources (DER) as envisioned by the Future Energy Jobs Act, which introduces the concept of a new rebate. Illinois currently has a net metering policy, which lets people with solar panels sell their unused solar energy back to the grid to offset their electric bill. Yet the net metering policy had an arbitrary “cap,” or a certain level after which homes and businesses adding solar panels would no longer be able to benefit from net metering.

Although Illinois is still a few years away from meeting that previous “cap,” when it does hit that level, the new policy will ensure additional DER will still be rewarded. Under the new plan, the Value-of-DER rebate will replace net metering on the distribution portion of a customer’s bill (the charge for delivering electricity from the local substation to your house) with an upfront payment, which credits the customer for the value their solar provides to the local grid over the system’s life. Net metering for the energy supply portion of the bill would remain – i.e. homes and businesses would still be able to offset a significant portion of their electric bills by selling excess energy.

What is unique about Illinois’ approach is that the rebate is an upfront payment, rather than on ongoing tariff or reduced net metering compensation, for example. By allowing customers to get paid for the value solar provides to the system at the time it is installed, in the same way new wires, poles, and transformers would, this upfront payment positions DER investments as equally or more beneficial to customers and the electric grid. This is a huge step not only for regulators, but for utilities as well, as they begin to see distributed energy as an asset to the system.

This is a huge step for utilities, as they begin to see distributed energy as an asset to the system.

The rebate would also factor-in the variables of location, time, and performance of DER in the rebate formula, allowing for a more precise calculation of the value to the grid. Peak electricity demand can stress the local grid, causing wear and tear and failure of the equipment that serve our homes and businesses. Power from DER during peak times and in certain areas can alleviate those stresses, therefore providing a greater value than during times of average demand.

In addition, factoring-in the value of performance will take into account the other functions of distributed energy that help keep the lights on. For example, batteries and advanced inverters can provide support for helping avoid voltage fluctuations that can cause outages and other costs to customers.

 

Related News

View more

Parked Electric Cars Earn $1,530 From Europe's Power Grids

Vehicle-to-Grid Revenue helps EV owners earn income via V2G, demand response, and ancillary services by exporting stored energy, supporting grid balancing, smart charging, and renewable integration with two-way charging infrastructure.

 

Key Points

Income EV owners earn by selling battery power to the grid for balancing, response, and flexibility services.

✅ Earn up to about $1,530 annually in Denmark trials

✅ Requires V2G-compatible EVs and two-way smart chargers

✅ Provides ancillary services and supports renewable integration

 

Electric car owners are earning as much as $1,530 a year just by parking their vehicle and feeding excess power back into the grid, effectively selling electricity back to the grid under V2G schemes.

Trials in Denmark carried out by Nissan and Italy’s biggest utility Enel Spa showed how batteries inside electric cars could, using vehicle-to-grid technology, help balance supply and demand at times and provide a new revenue stream for those who own the vehicles.

Technology linking vehicles to the grid marks another challenge for utilities already struggling to integrate wind and solar power into their distribution system. As the use of plug-in cars spreads, grid managers will have to pay closer attention and, with proper management, to when motorists draw from the system and when they can smooth variable flows.

For example, California's grid stability efforts include leveraging EVs as programs expand.

“If you blindingly deploy in the market a massive number of electric cars without any visibility or control over the way they impact the electricity grid, you might create new problems,” said Francisco Carranza, director of energy services at Nissan Europe in an interview with Bloomberg New Energy Finance.


 

While the Tokyo-based automaker has trials with more than 100 cars across Europe, only those in Denmark are able to earn money by feeding power back into the grid. There, fleet operators collected about 1,300 euros ($1,530) a year using the two-way charge points, said Carranza.

Restrictions on accessing the market in the U.K. means the company needs to reach about 150 cars before they can get paid for power sent back to the grid. That could be achieved by the end of this year, he said.

“It’s feasible,” he said. “It’s just a matter of finding the appropriate business model to deploy the business wide-scale.’’

Electric car demand globally is expected to soar, challenging state power grids and putting further pressure on grid operators to find new ways of balancing demand. Power consumption from vehicles will grow to 1,800 terawatt-hours in 2040 from just 6 terawatt-hours now, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance.

 

Related News

View more

Sign Up for Electricity Forum’s Newsletter

Stay informed with our FREE Newsletter — get the latest news, breakthrough technologies, and expert insights, delivered straight to your inbox.

Electricity Today T&D Magazine Subscribe for FREE

Stay informed with the latest T&D policies and technologies.
  • Timely insights from industry experts
  • Practical solutions T&D engineers
  • Free access to every issue

Download the 2025 Electrical Training Catalog

Explore 50+ live, expert-led electrical training courses –

  • Interactive
  • Flexible
  • CEU-cerified