California regulators weigh whether the state needs more power plants

NB Power seasonal electricity rates face backlash amid smart grid delays, meter reading limits, and billing dispute risks, as consultants recommend AMI smart meters for accurate winter-summer pricing, time-of-use alignment, and consumer protection.

Key Points

NB Power seasonal electricity rates raise winter prices and lower summer prices to match costs, using accurate AMI metering.

✅ Requires midnight meter reads without AMI, increasing billing disputes.

✅ Shifts costs to electric-heat homes during high winter demand.

✅ Recommended to wait for smart grid AMI for time-of-use accuracy.

A consultant hired by NB Power is warning of significant consumer "backlash" if the utility is made to establish seasonal rates for electricity, as seen in B.C. and Quebec smart meter disputes among customers.

The consultant's report even suggests customers might have to read their own power meters at midnight twice a year — on April Fool's and Halloween — to make the system work.

"Virtually all bills will have errors ... billing disputes can be expected to increase, as seen in a $666 smart meter bill in N.S. that raised concerns, possibly dramatically, and there will be no means of resolving disputes in a satisfactory way," reads a report by Elenchus Research Associates that was commissioned by NB Power and filed with the Energy and Utilities Board on Thursday.

NB Power is in the middle of a year-long "rate design" review ordered by the EUB that is focused in part on whether the utility should charge lower prices for electricity in the summer and higher prices in the winter to better reflect the actual cost of serving customers.

New network of meters needed

Elenchus was asked to study how that might work but the company is arguing against any switch until NB Power upgrades its entire network of power meters, given old meters in N.B. have raised concerns.

Elenchus said seasonal rates require an accurate reading of every customer's power meter at midnight on March 31 and again on Oct. 31, the dates when power rates would switch between winter and summer prices.

A consultant's report says NB Power doesn't have the manpower to properly read meters if it brings in seasonal rates. (CBC)

But NB Power does not have the sophisticated infrastructure in place to read meters remotely, or the manpower to visit every customer location on the same day, so Elenchus said the utility would have to guesstimate bills or rely on the technical savvy and honesty of customers themselves.

"Customers could be asked to read their own meters late in the day on March 31 (and October 31)," suggested the report. "Aside from the obvious inconvenience and impracticality of that approach, NB Power would have no means of verifying the customers' meter reads."

Residential customers would see hike

Another looming controversy with seasonal rates is that it would raise costs for residential customers, especially to those who heat with electricity, a pressure seen with a 14% rate increase in Nova Scotia recently.

Elenchus estimated seasonal rates would add nearly $6 million to the cost of residential bills overall, with the largest increases flowing to those with baseboard heat.

Electric heat customers consume the majority of their power during the five months that would have the highest prices and Elenchus said that is another reason to wait for better power meters before proceeding.

NB Power has an ambitious plan to bring in a new meter system, and the consultant's report recommends waiting for that to happen before switching to seasonal rates. (Google Street View)

NB Power has an ambitious plan to upgrade meters and related infrastructure as part of its transformation to a "smart grid," but it is a multi-year plan.

Once in place the utility would be able to read meters remotely hour to hour, allowing power rates to be adjusted for times of the day and days of the week as well as seasonally.

Consumers will also have in-home pricing and consumption displays to help them manage their bills.

Elenchus said waiting for those meters will give electric heat customers a chance to avoid higher seasonal costs by letting them shift power consumption to lower-priced parts of the day.

"The introduction of seasonal rates would be more acceptable once AMI (advanced metering infrastructure) has been deployed," concludes the report.

A final hearing on NB Power's rate design, where seasonal rates and other changes will be considered, amid a power market overhaul debate in Alberta that industry is watching, is scheduled for next April.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Energy Policy News

Renewable Energy Market Reform aligns solar and wind with modern grid pricing, tackling intermittency via batteries and demand response, stabilizing wholesale power prices, and enabling capacity markets to finance flexible supply for deep decarbonization.

Key Points

A market overhaul that integrates variable renewables, funds flexibility, and stabilizes grids as solar and wind grow.

✅ Dynamic pricing rewards flexibility and demand response

✅ Capacity markets finance reliability during intermittency

✅ Smart grids, storage, HV lines balance variable supply

ALMOST 150 years after photovoltaic cells and wind turbines were invented, they still generate only 7% of the world’s electricity. Yet something remarkable is happening. From being peripheral to the energy system just over a decade ago, they are now growing faster than any other energy source and their falling costs are making them competitive with fossil fuels. BP, an oil firm, expects renewables to account for half of the growth in global energy supply over the next 20 years. It is no longer far-fetched to think that the world is entering an era of clean, unlimited and cheap, abundant electricity for all. About time, too. 

There is a $20trn hitch, though. To get from here to there requires huge amounts of investment over the next few decades, to replace old smog-belching power plants and to upgrade the pylons and wires that bring electricity to consumers. Normally investors like putting their money into electricity because it offers reliable returns. Yet green energy has a dirty secret. The more it is deployed, the more it lowers the price of power from any source. That makes it hard to manage the transition to a carbon-free future, during which many generating technologies, clean and dirty, need to remain profitable if the lights are to stay on. Unless the market is fixed, subsidies to the industry will only grow.

Policymakers are already seeing this inconvenient truth as a reason to put the brakes on renewable energy. In parts of Europe and China, investment in renewables is slowing as subsidies are cut back, even as Europe’s electricity demand continues to rise. However, the solution is not less wind and solar. It is to rethink how the world prices clean energy in order to make better use of it.

Shock to the system

At its heart, the problem is that government-supported renewable energy has been imposed on a market designed in a different era. For much of the 20th century, electricity was made and moved by vertically integrated, state-controlled monopolies. From the 1980s onwards, many of these were broken up, privatised and liberalised, so that market forces could determine where best to invest. Today only about 6% of electricity users get their power from monopolies. Yet everywhere the pressure to decarbonise power supply has brought the state creeping back into markets. This is disruptive for three reasons. The first is the subsidy system itself. The other two are inherent to the nature of wind and solar: their intermittency and their very low running costs. All three help explain why power prices are low and public subsidies are addictive.

First, the splurge of public subsidy, of about $800bn since 2008, has distorted the market. It came about for noble reasons—to counter climate change and prime the pump for new, costly technologies, including wind turbines and solar panels. But subsidies hit just as electricity consumption in the rich world was stagnating because of growing energy efficiency and the financial crisis. The result was a glut of power-generating capacity that has slashed the revenues utilities earn from wholesale power markets and hence deterred investment.

Second, green power is intermittent. The vagaries of wind and sun—especially in countries without favourable weather—mean that turbines and solar panels generate electricity only part of the time. To keep power flowing, the system relies on conventional power plants, such as coal, gas or nuclear, to kick in when renewables falter. But because they are idle for long periods, they find it harder to attract private investors. So, to keep the lights on, they require public funds.

Everyone is affected by a third factor: renewable energy has negligible or zero marginal running costs—because the wind and the sun are free. In a market that prefers energy produced at the lowest short-term cost, wind and solar take business from providers that are more expensive to run, such as coal plants, depressing wholesale electricity prices, and hence revenues for all.

Get smart

The higher the penetration of renewables, the worse these problems get—especially in saturated markets. In Europe, which was first to feel the effects, utilities have suffered a “lost decade” of falling returns, stranded assets and corporate disruption. Last year, Germany’s two biggest electricity providers, E.ON and RWE, both split in two. In renewable-rich parts of America, power providers struggle to find investors for new plants, reflecting U.S. grid challenges that slow a full transition. Places with an abundance of wind, such as China, are curtailing wind farms to keep coal plants in business.

The corollary is that the electricity system is being re-regulated as investment goes chiefly to areas that benefit from public support. Paradoxically, that means the more states support renewables, the more they pay for conventional power plants, too, using “capacity payments” to alleviate intermittency. In effect, politicians rather than markets are once again deciding how to avoid blackouts. They often make mistakes: Germany’s support for cheap, dirty lignite caused emissions to rise, notwithstanding huge subsidies for renewables. Without a new approach the renewables revolution will stall.

The good news is that new technology can help fix the problem.  Digitalisation, smart meters and batteries are enabling companies and households to smooth out their demand—by doing some energy-intensive work at night, for example. This helps to cope with intermittent supply. Small, modular power plants, which are easy to flex up or down, are becoming more popular, as are high-voltage grids that can move excess power around the network more efficiently, aligning with common goals for electricity networks worldwide.

The bigger task is to redesign power markets to reflect the new need for flexible supply and demand. They should adjust prices more frequently, to reflect the fluctuations of the weather. At times of extreme scarcity, a high fixed price could kick in to prevent blackouts. Markets should reward those willing to use less electricity to balance the grid, just as they reward those who generate more of it. Bills could be structured to be higher or lower depending how strongly a customer wanted guaranteed power all the time—a bit like an insurance policy. In short, policymakers should be clear they have a problem and that the cause is not renewable energy, but the out-of-date system of electricity pricing. Then they should fix it.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

UPS Tesla Electric Semi Order marks the largest pre-order of all-electric Class-8 big rigs, advancing sustainable freight logistics with lower total cost of ownership, expanded charging infrastructure support, and competitive range versus diesel trucks.

Key Points

UPS's purchase of 125 Tesla all-electric Class-8 semis to cut costs, emissions, and modernize long-haul freight.

✅ Largest public pre-order: 125 electric Class-8 trucks

✅ Aims lower total cost of ownership vs diesel

✅ Includes charging infrastructure consulting by Tesla

United Parcel Service Inc. said on Tuesday it is buying 125 Tesla Inc. all-electric semi-trucks, the largest order for the big rig so far, as the package delivery company expands its fleet of alternative-fuel vehicles, including options like the all-electric Transit cargo van now entering the market.

Tesla is trying to convince the trucking community it can build an affordable electric big rig with the range and cargo capacity to compete with relatively low-cost, time-tested diesel trucks. This is the largest public order of the big rig so far, Tesla said.

The Tesla trucks will cost around $200,000 each for a total order of about $25 million. UPS expects the semi-trucks, the big rigs that haul freight along America's highways, will have a lower total cost of ownership than conventional vehicles, which run about $120,000.

Tesla has received pre-orders from such major companies as Wal-Mart, fleet operator J.B. Hunt Transport Services Inc. and food service distributor Sysco Corp.

Prior to UPS, the largest single pre-order came from PepsiCo Inc, for 100 trucks. 

UPS said it has provided Tesla with real-world routing information as part of its evaluation of the vehicle's expected performance.

"As with any introductory technology for our fleet, we want to make sure it's in a position to succeed," Scott Phillippi, UPS senior director for automotive maintenance and engineering for international operations, told Reuters.

Phillippi said the 125 trucks will allow UPS to conduct a proper test of their abilities. He said the company was still determining their routes, but the semis will "primarily be in the United States." Tesla will provide consultation and support on charging infrastructure, as electric truck fleets will need a lot of power to operate at scale.

"We have high expectations and are very optimistic that this will be a good product and it will have firm support from Tesla to make it work," Phillippi said.

The UPS alternative fuel fleet already includes trucks propelled by electricity, natural gas, propane and other non-traditional fuels, and interest in electric mail trucks underscores how delivery fleets are evolving.

About 260,000 semis, or heavy-duty Class-8 trucks, are produced in North America annually, according to FTR, an industry economics research firm.

Including the UPS order, Tesla has at least 410 pre-orders in hand, according to a Reuters tally.

Navistar International Corp. and Volkswagen AG hope to launch a smaller, electric medium-duty truck by late 2019, while rival Daimler AG has delivered the first of a smaller range of electric trucks to customers in New York, and Volvo Trucks planned a complete range of electric trucks in Europe by 2021.

Tesla unveiled its semi last month, following earlier plans to reveal the truck in October, and expects the truck to be in production by 2019.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• EV Infrastructure News

Kemper County power plant costs and delays highlight lignite coal gasification, syngas production, carbon capture targets, and looming rate plans as Mississippi Power navigates Public Service Commission oversight and shareholder-ratepayer risk.

Key Points

Costs exceed $7.5B with repeated delays; rate impacts loom as syngas, lignite, and carbon capture systems mature.

✅ Estimate tops $7.5B; customers could fund about $4.3B

✅ Carbon capture target: 65% CO2 via syngas from lignite

✅ Rate plans pending before the Public Service Commission

A Mississippi utility on Monday delayed making proposals for how its customers should pay for an ever-more-expensive power plant, even as the estimated cost of the facility crossed $7.5 billion.

The Kemper County power plant will be tasked with mining lignite coal a few hundred yards away from the plant. That coal is moved through a process that will convert it to syngas. The syngas is then used to drive the energy output of the plant, and the resulting electricity is then moved into the grid, where transmission projects influence regional reliability and capacity.

Thomas Fanning, CEO of parent Southern Co., told shareholders in May that Mississippi Power would file rate plans for its Kemper County power plant this month. But still unable to operate the plant steadily enough to declare it finished, Mississippi Power punted, instead asking to hold rates level for 11 months to pay off costs that have already been approved by regulators.

Mississippi Power says it now hopes to reach commercial operation in June. The plant is more than three years behind schedule, with 10 delays announced in the past 18 months. It was originally supposed to cost $2.9 billion.

The company also said monday that it will have to replace troublesome parts of the facility much sooner than expected, including units that cool the synthetic gas produced from soft lignite coal by two gasifier units, plus ash handling systems in the gasifiers.

Kemper is designed to take synthetic gas, pipe it through a chemical plant to remove carbon dioxide and other chemicals, and then burn the gas in turbines to generate electricity. It’s designed to capture 65 percent of carbon dioxide from the coal, releasing only as much of the climate-warming gas as a typical natural gas plant. It’s a key effort nationally to maintain coal as a viable fuel source, even as coal unit retirements proceed in other states.

Mississippi Power raised its estimate of Kemper’s cost by $209.4 million, with shareholders absorbing $185.9 million, while ratepayers could be asked to pay $23.5 million. Overall, customers could be asked to pay $4.3 billion. Southern shareholders have agreed to absorb $3.1 billion, which has risen by $500 million since November.

The elected three-member Public Service Commission in 2015 allowed the company to raise rates on its 188,000 customers by $126 million a year. That paid for $840 million in Kemper work, which began generating electricity in 2014 using piped-in natural gas. Some items covered by that 15 percent rate increase will be paid off in coming months, but Mississippi Power now proposes to repay costs from regulatory proceedings earlier than originally projected.

In testimony filed with the Public Service Commission, Mississippi Power Chief Financial Officer Moses Fagin said that keeping rates level would reduce whiplash to customers when rates rise later to pay for Kemper, would pay off accumulated costs more quickly and would help the company wean itself off financial support from Southern Co. while maintaining credit ratings and positioning for a possible bond rating upgrade over time.

“Cash flow is important to the company in maintaining its current ratings and beginning to rebuild its credit strength on a more independent basis apart from the extraordinary parental support that has been required in recent years to maintain financial integrity,” Fagin testified.

Spokesman Jeff Shepard said Mississippi Power is still drawing up two rate plans — one requiring a sharp, immediate rate increase, and a “rate mitigation plan” that might cushion increases amid declining returns in coal markets. He said the company isn’t sure when it will file them. Fagin suggested the Public Service Commission set a new deadline of March 2, 2018.

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News

Renewables Beat Brown Coal in Australia, as solar and wind surged to nearly 10,000 GWh, stabilizing the grid with battery storage during peak demand, after Hazelwood's closure, Green Energy Markets reported.

Key Points

It describes a 2017-18 summer when solar, wind, and storage generated more electricity than brown coal in Australia.

✅ Solar and wind hit nearly 10,000 GWh in summer 2017-18

✅ Brown coal fell to about 9,100 GWh after Hazelwood closure

✅ Batteries stabilized peak demand; Tesla responded in milliseconds

Renewable energy generated more electricity than brown coal during Australia’s summer for the first time in 2017-18, according to a new report by Green Energy Markets.

Continued growth in solar, as part of Australia's energy transition, pushed renewable generation in Australia to just under 10,000 gigawatt hours between December 2017 and February 2018. With the Hazelwood plant knocked out of the system last year, brown coal’s output in the same period was just over 9,100 GWh.

Renewables produced 40% more than gas over the period, and was exceeded only by black coal, reflecting trends seen in U.S. renewables surpassing coal in 2022.

#google#

The report, commissioned by GetUp, found renewables were generating particularly large amounts of electricity when it was most needed, producing 32% more than brown coal during summer between 11am and 7pm, when demand peaks.

Coal in decline: an energy industry on life support

Solar in particular was working to support the system, on average producing more than Hazelwood was capable of producing between 9am and 5pm.

A further 5,000 megawatts of large-scale renewables projects was under construction in February, supporting 17,445 jobs, while renewables became the second-most prevalent U.S. electricity source in 2020.

GetUp’s campaign director, Miriam Lyons, said the latest renewable energy index showed renewables were keeping the lights on while coal became increasingly unreliable, a trend echoed as renewables surpassed coal in the U.S. in recent years.

“Over summer renewables kept houses cool and lights on during peak demand times when people needed electricity most,” Lyons said. “Meanwhile dirty old coal plants are becoming increasingly unreliable in the heat.

“These ageing clunkers failed 36 times over summer.

“Clean energy rescued people from blackouts this summer. When the clapped-out Loy Yang coal plant tripped, South Australia’s giant Tesla battery reacted in milliseconds to keep the power on.

“It’s clear that a smart electricity grid based on a combination of renewable energy and storage is the best way to deliver clean, affordable energy for all Australians.”

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Renewable Energy News

US Shift From Coal to Renewables accelerates as natural gas, solar, and wind power gain market share, driven by the Paris climate agreement, clean energy mandates, smart grid upgrades, and energy efficiency.

Key Points

An industry trend where power producers replace coal with natural gas, solar, and wind to meet clean energy goals.

✅ Shareholders and customers demand cleaner power portfolios

✅ Natural gas, solar, and wind outcompete coal on cost and risk

✅ Smart grid and efficiency investments reduce emissions further

President Trump once again promised to revive the U.S. coal industry when he announced his intention to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris climate agreement.

But that reversal seems as unlikely as ever as electric power producers, the biggest consumers of coal in the U.S., continue to shift to natural gas and renewable energy sources like solar and wind power. In 2016, natural gas became the leading fuel for U.S. electricity generation for the first time, responsible for 33.8% of the output, compared with 30.4% for coal, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, even as coal-fired generation was projected to rise in 2021 in the short term.

Nick Akins, the CEO of American Electric Power, one of the largest utilities in the U.S., says the preference for gas, renewables and energy efficiency, will only grow in response to increasing demands from shareholders and customers for cleaner energy, regardless of changes in national energy policy.

With 5.4 million customers in 11 states, AEP plans to spend $1.5 billion on renewable energy from 2017 through 2019, and $13 billion on transmission and distribution improvements, including new “smart” technologies that will make the grid more resilient and efficient, AEP says.

We spoke with Akins on Thursday, just after Trump’s announcement. The transcript is edited for length and clarity.

What do you think of Trump’s decision to pull the U.S. from the climate agreement?

I don’t think it’s unexpected. He obviously made the point that he’s willing to renegotiate or have further dialogue about it. That’s a good sign. From our perspective, we’re going to continue along the path we’re already on toward a cleaner energy economy.

AEP and the U.S. electric power industry in general have been moving away from coal in favor of natural gas and renewable energy. Will this decision by the Trump administration have any impact on that trend?

If you look at our resource plans in all of the states we serve, they are focused on renewables, natural gas and transmission, as declining returns from coal generation pressure investment choices across the industry. And big-data analytics improves the efficiency of the grid, so energy efficiency is obviously a key component, as Americans use less electricity overall.

Our carbon dioxide emissions in 2016 were 44% below 2000 levels, and that progress will continue with the additions of more renewables, energy efficiency and natural gas.

So, you don’t see coal making a comeback at AEP or other utilities?

No, I don’t think so. … You wouldn’t make a decision (to build a coal power plant) at this point because it’s heavily capital-intensive, and involves a longer-term process and risk to build. And, of course, you can add renewables that are very efficient and natural gas that’s efficient and much less expensive and risky, in terms of construction and operation.

Do you plan to close any more coal-powered plants soon? 

I suspect we’ll see some more retirements in the future, with coal and nuclear closures test just transition in many communities, and as we progress towards that cleaner energy economy, and consider the expectations of our customers and shareholders for us to mitigate risk, you’ll continue to see that happen.

But on the other hand, I want to make sure there’s an understanding that coal will remain a part of the portfolio, even though in rare cases new coal plants are still being built where options are limited, but it will be of a lesser degree because of these other resources that are available to us now that weren’t available to us just a few years ago.

Do you find yourself under more or less pressure from customers and shareholders to move to cleaner forms of energy?

I think there’s more pressure. Investors are looking for the sustainability of the company going forward and mitigation of risks … From a customer standpoint, we have some large customers interested in moving into our service territory who are looking for cleaner energy, and want to know if we’re focused on that. Some of them want to be supplied entirely by those clean sources. So, we’re clearly responding to our customers’ and our shareholders’ expectations.

What’s the solution for workers at coal mines and coal power plants who have lost their jobs?

Certainly, the skill sets of employees in mining and around machinery are transferable to other areas of manufacturing, like aerospace and defense. So, we’re really focusing on economic-development efforts in our service territories … particularly in the coal states … to bring coal miners back to work, not necessarily in coal mines but certainly (in manufacturing).

Related News

• Electricity Forum News

• Power Generation News