Policymakers and industry seek a formula to assure competitiveness and resource adequacy.
New Jersey’s bid to force prices downward in PJM’s capacity market not only raises the alarm about market manipulation. It also reveals a dilemma that’s preventing new generation from being built. Incumbent interests and political motivations make PJM less attractive to investment than it should be.
Why Idaho is fed up with renewables.
Idaho Power has more wind power than it can use—so much that it’s costing its ratepayers a bundle. It wants out, so it won’t have to buy from all the small wind farms that claim “QF” status under the 1978 PURPA law.
Integrating controllable demand into real-time, security constrained economic dispatch.
Historically, grid operators tapped into voluntary load reduction as a last resort for keeping the lights on. But now, smart grid technologies and dynamic pricing mechanisms bring vastly greater potential for using load as a dispatchable resource. Effective implementation requires advanced technologies—and also foresight in creating programs, policies, and market mechanisms.
Factoring customer-owned generation into forecasting, planning, and operations.
The long-predicted future of distributed generation is now becoming a reality. Customers increasingly are installing and operating behind-the-meter generation systems, creating challenges and opportunities for utilities. ConEdison’s experience demonstrates the dangers and challenges, as well as the opportunities for becoming partners with utility customers.
Learning lessons from PSE’s residential demand response pilot.
Utilities and regulators increasingly are considering direct control of residential load to help manage the grid. Evaluating the recent experience of one winter-peaking utility—Puget Sound Energy—provides insights into best practices for ramping up direct load control.
A purposeful approach to setting energy prices.
Changes in regulatory requirements, market structures, and operational technologies have introduced complexities that traditional ratemaking approaches can’t address. Poorly designed rates lead to cross-subsidies, inequitable outcomes, and perverse incentives. An objective-based approach can better communicate costs to customers in a way that better serves operations and policy goals.
Re-starting the Big Build calls for revisiting cost-recovery mechanisms.
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.
Bold plan for independence, or more partisan overreach?