By Jeremy Eckstein
With storage too costly at present, Pacific Northwest utilities needing operating flexibility are weighing the relative advantages of demand response programs and establishing or joining a regional energy imbalance market.
n this paper I explore what sources of electricity system flexibility are likely to be adopted in Oregon and Washington in order to manage predicted increases in renewable energy. Although it is Northwest-centric in its focus and industry review, I believe it has relevance to US markets in general, as renewables integration and the search for greater system flexibility is of wide and growing interest. I also explore policy options to encourage adoption of these technologies.
By Bob Gibson
Changes in the structure of the evolving electricity markets of the U.S. and Germany may make national differences in policy and public perception irrelevant, as new technologies take hold.
hen E.ON, one of Europe’s largest utilities, announced in December that it would spin off its conventional power generation business into a separate entity and refocus on renewables, energy efficiency and grid operations, an obvious question arose: Could similar transitions be coming to utilities in the United States? In a word, yes.
By Bill Massey
It’s indisputable that competition is a highly effective way to ensure that electricity, an essential engine of our economy, is provided to users reliably and at lowest cost. But it’s also crucial that we preserve rules that assure fair and wholesome competition.
t is hard to believe that almost two decades have passed since federal and state utility regulators began in earnest to adopt competitive markets as a preferred way to ensure a reliable supply of electricity at the lowest available cost. What’s even harder to believe is that there are still skeptics who doubt that electricity markets – where they have been fully implemented – are indeed beneficial to consumers and the regional economies they power. Members of the COMPETE Coalition are not to be found among the skeptics.
By Peter Cappers and Andy Satchwell
State regulators and policymakers should act now, while demand response is under judicial review, to develop contingency plans to ensure resource adequacy is not jeopardized and that DR remains a robust and economic resource for meeting electricity needs.
y vacating FERC Order 745 in Electric Power Supply Association vs. FERC (“EPSA”) , the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C Circuit injected uncertainty into the future of demand response (DR) resources in U.S. wholesale markets. Among several things, the decision explicitly identified “incentive-responsive demand” as a retail transaction, not a wholesale transaction. Thus, demand response, as the industry has come to understand it within the confines of ISO/RTO-administered energy markets, is not under FERC jurisdiction but rather state jurisdiction. However, if the Court of Appeals’ majority arguments are taken to their logical conclusion, then FERC may not have jurisdiction over DR providing any bulk-power system service, not just energy.
By Bentham Paulos
As wind and solar mature commercially they have novel effects on power system operations, planning, and finances. With Germany and California in the vanguard, policy solutions are emerging. But to best pursue a clean energy future, we first must change the way we look at our power systems, starting with the daily load profile.
he growth of wind and solar power are introducing a new element into grid operations, and changing the way grid operators look at the system. Indeed, they are changing the familiar daily shape of the demand profile.
If you would like to obtain a complimentary PDF file of Mr Paulos's article on Net Demand, and were unable to sign up for a 30-day free trial to Electricity Daily and ElectricityPolicy.com, please email your request to [email protected].