Yodrak
Well-known member
An interesting news item illutrating how some wind developers (the example one is a big-oil company) are seekng to charge higher rates for their energy by manipulating the size and number of their projects, and how public utility commissions do what they are supposed to do - keep the price of electricity reasonable and protect consumers from such manipulations by generators.
http://www.energybiz.com/article/11/08/states-wont-give-higher-rates-wind&utm_medium=eNL&utm_campaign=EB_DAILY2&utm_term=Original-Member
For those who may not be able to access the referenced web site:
States Won't Give Higher Rates to Wind
Aug 03 - The Times-News, Idaho -
A handful of Idaho wind energy developers will have to negotiate how much they'll be paid for the energy they produce after state regulators said again that they'll offer special rates to only the smallest producers.
The Idaho Public Utilities Commission on Wednesday reaffirmed four June 8 orders stating that it won't extend to 14 proposed projects its previously larger cap on the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act rates that created a favorable climate for the development of wind energy in Idaho. Contracts for the proposals -- including nine in the Mini-Cassia area -- became effective on or after the deadline for the expanded rate cap expired, the PUC said in a Wednesday release.
The state is required to determine and publish the special rate for projects that develop up to 100 kilowatts. During the state's wind industry infancy, the PUC opted to extend the rate to projects that produce up to 10 megawatts -- 100 times the mandated cap -- through Dec. 14, 2010. The rate is based on the price of natural gas, and pays qualifying wind and solar producers based on the cost a purchasing utility -- Idaho Power, Areva and Rocky Mountain Power in the Gem State -- avoids by not having to generate or buy power from elsewhere.
Idaho's regulated electric utilities petitioned the PUC last November to reduce the energy cap it offered, claiming that large Idaho wind projects were breaking themselves into smaller 10 MW projects in order to take advantage of PURPA rates that were higher than what they could negotiate with the utilities.
The utilities claimed the increased cap forced them into buying power they don't need at rates that aren't reasonable for their customers.
In June, the Northwest and Intermountain Power Producers Coalition argued that the 10 MW cap has worked "remarkably well for Idaho" and called its loss "unfortunate."
But the proposed Cotterel project near Burley represents the type of development the utilities railed against. Shell-owned Cotterel WindEnergy Center initially responded to a 2009 Idaho Power bid request as one large 150 MW project, according to the PUC. But after an agreement wasn't reached, it was divided into five 10 MW projects, for which Cotterel submitted five PURPA contracts scheduled to start in 2014.
Under the 10 MW cap, the projects' projected earnings stretched to $716.4 million over 20 years.
http://www.energybiz.com/article/11/08/states-wont-give-higher-rates-wind&utm_medium=eNL&utm_campaign=EB_DAILY2&utm_term=Original-Member
For those who may not be able to access the referenced web site:
States Won't Give Higher Rates to Wind
Aug 03 - The Times-News, Idaho -
A handful of Idaho wind energy developers will have to negotiate how much they'll be paid for the energy they produce after state regulators said again that they'll offer special rates to only the smallest producers.
The Idaho Public Utilities Commission on Wednesday reaffirmed four June 8 orders stating that it won't extend to 14 proposed projects its previously larger cap on the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act rates that created a favorable climate for the development of wind energy in Idaho. Contracts for the proposals -- including nine in the Mini-Cassia area -- became effective on or after the deadline for the expanded rate cap expired, the PUC said in a Wednesday release.
The state is required to determine and publish the special rate for projects that develop up to 100 kilowatts. During the state's wind industry infancy, the PUC opted to extend the rate to projects that produce up to 10 megawatts -- 100 times the mandated cap -- through Dec. 14, 2010. The rate is based on the price of natural gas, and pays qualifying wind and solar producers based on the cost a purchasing utility -- Idaho Power, Areva and Rocky Mountain Power in the Gem State -- avoids by not having to generate or buy power from elsewhere.
Idaho's regulated electric utilities petitioned the PUC last November to reduce the energy cap it offered, claiming that large Idaho wind projects were breaking themselves into smaller 10 MW projects in order to take advantage of PURPA rates that were higher than what they could negotiate with the utilities.
The utilities claimed the increased cap forced them into buying power they don't need at rates that aren't reasonable for their customers.
In June, the Northwest and Intermountain Power Producers Coalition argued that the 10 MW cap has worked "remarkably well for Idaho" and called its loss "unfortunate."
But the proposed Cotterel project near Burley represents the type of development the utilities railed against. Shell-owned Cotterel WindEnergy Center initially responded to a 2009 Idaho Power bid request as one large 150 MW project, according to the PUC. But after an agreement wasn't reached, it was divided into five 10 MW projects, for which Cotterel submitted five PURPA contracts scheduled to start in 2014.
Under the 10 MW cap, the projects' projected earnings stretched to $716.4 million over 20 years.
