Original-cost ratemaking doesn’t suit the challenges facing utilities today.
A. Lawrence Kolbe, Philip Q Hanser, Bin Zhou
Levelized rates can serve customers’ interests, while also accelerating capital investment and providing an economic stimulus to the economy.
Utility CEOs face disruptive trends.
Top executives at AEP, the California ISO, and El Paso Electric address key challenges and opportunities.
Re-starting the Big Build calls for revisiting cost-recovery mechanisms.
By Sherman Elliott and Ralph Zarumba
As the industry resumes major capital-spending programs, utilities and their stakeholders are rightly concerned about the effects on prices. Traditional regulatory approaches expose utilities to risks and costs, and can bring rate shock when capital spending finally makes its way into customers’ bills. Pre-funding investments can provide a smoother on-ramp to bearing the costs of a 21st-Century utility system — but it also raises questions for utilities to address.
Second thoughts on transmission’s golden egg.
The electric utility industry offers up a wealth of ideas on how the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission might reform its policy, adopted under FERC Order 679 in 2006, of granting financial incentives for investments in transmission line projects that ensure reliability or mitigate line congestion so as to reduce the cost of delivered power. Fortnightly’s Bruce W. Radford reports.
One of the most ambitious transmission projects in America today is CAPX2020, a series of lines in Minnesota and surrounding states. In this first of two exclusive interviews, Fortnightly's Spark talks with Will Kaul, Great River Energy’s v.p. of transmission, about how the project managed to succeed where others have failed.
Recently electricity started flowing through a new power line between Monticello and St. Cloud, Minn. This 28-mile, 345-kV segment represents a major milestone for one reason: it’s the first wire to go live in the 700-mile CAPX2020 transmission venture.
Complex problems call for collective measures.
Michael T. Burr, Editor-in-Chief
Among all of the investment priorities in the U.S. electric power industry, one stands out as having the greatest momentum: transmission. This is interesting because transmission is perhaps the most difficult type of power infrastructure to develop, and has been for decades. Editor Michael T. Burr talks with executives at Xcel Energy and Great River Energy to learn how the CAPX2020 consortium has managed to succeed where others failed.
(December 2011) Responding to Contributing Editor John Bewick’s analysis of factors impeding the nuclear renaissance in the wake of the Fukushima disaster. Plus comments about construction work in progress provisions as a strategy for saving ratepayers' money.
In an October order, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) trimmed the authorized rate incentive for the RITELine transmission project by one-third. The action prompted Commissioner Moeller to ask whether the commission is retreating from its incentive policy on needed transmission lines.
FERC’s move might appear calculated to send a message to the power industry.
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) in mid-October granted a trimmed-down set of rate incentives for the proposed $1.6 billion RITELine transmission line project.
With looming mandates and aging infrastructure, utilities need regulatory support.
The balance of stakeholder interests in utility ratemaking has shifted over the past decade toward achieving social policy goals. A more sustainable balance is required if utilities and regulators hope to preserve utility service quality and affordability.
New regulatory frameworks encourage electric infrastructure investment.
Under business-as-usual regulation, electric utilities must file more and more rate cases to keep up with rising costs. New approaches provide for modest but stable recovery of costs outside rate cases, while providing ongoing regulatory oversight and creating strong incentives for utilities to efficiently manage construction projects.