How rules muted price signals and did not ensure efficient siting.
Of the new rules proposed by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) for interconnecting new power plants to the transmission grid, the most controversial (for transmission providers and generators alike) is FERC's choice of who should pay to construct the various categories of required new facilities.
RTO cost/benefit studies are difficult to reconcile.
The premise behind the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) push for regional transmission organizations (RTOs)-that they will provide positive economic benefits to society- increasingly is being challenged.
FERC's call for regional PUCs will force state regulators to declare their allegiance.
How will regulators re-engineer restructuring? That was the theme of the seventh annual convention of the Mid-Atlantic Conference of Regulatory Commissioners (MARUC). But while the theme may have been the re-engineering of restructuring, other regulators felt more inclined to discuss the "re-regulating of restructuring."
Will FERC's market solution wipe out state commissions?
One might say, when it comes to FERC, some state public utilities commissions' lack of faith is disturbing—to paraphrase Lord Vader. It's also necessary, as any journalist would tell you. The FERC NOPR on standard market design (SMD)—which completes the "trilogy" of regulation on wholesale markets, as chairman Pat Wood described it—had some state PUCs blasting the NOPR even before its July 31 release.
By Lori A. Burkhart
Gas-fired power is king today, but fuel diversity needs and new technologies may open the door for nuclear and coal.
The nation's demand for electricity is expected to grow by over 40 percent in the next 20 years, according to the Energy Information Administration (EIA). Meeting that need will require a great number of new generating plants. The burning question is, what will fuel these new plants?
Pennsylvania loses faith in FERC, looks for help from the Justice department.
"A well functioning market on an average day works better than we regulators can do on our best day." Perhaps this quote, attributed to Pat Wood, chairman of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC), best captures the prevailing view among transmission officials in the Northeast. But the feeling out West is decidedly different. So is the mood among state utility regulators.
Why grid owners don't like FERC's new rules on gen interconnection.
A year ago, when a group of electric utilities in the Southwest signed off on deals to hook up new generators in Arizona with an innovative "common bus" treatment for two adjoining switchyards at the Palo Verde hub, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) was quick to heap on the praise. "Attaboy," said FERC's Pat Wood, at the commission's meeting of July 25, 2001. Nevertheless, over the past twelve months, FERC twice has proposed new rules to govern the way in which new power plants gain the right to interconnect with the interstate transmission grid. These new rules on gen interconnection form an essential part of the puzzle more aptly known as the standard market design (SMD).
Some thoughts on who should take the lead and how to set up financial incentives.
One of the most interesting questions that arises from federal restructuring of the electric grid, with regional transmission organizations (RTOs) and a standard market design (SMD), concerns the risk of building transmission in an RTO environment.