Publish to Newswire
Add an EventFrom the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature
Energy 2016
A report on two major projects moving forward to alter how electric energy is produced and distributed in the US. More renewables, less nuclear and coal is the goal, but is that even possible with capitalists controlling the market?
Energy 2016
--Shutting Down Nuclear and Building Renewables; Easier Said than Done
As the state implements SB350, a season of energy compromise is being called for
Energy agencies and board rooms have been hopping since summer making plans to transform the California energy landscape as nothing has since energy deregulation in 1996 separated generation from distribution. Two big ideas in the works: one would incorporate California in to a Western Regional grid aimed at expanding access to wind power; the other would end nuclear power generation in California. Both are under siege from many directions.
The shut down of Diablo Canyon, negotiated between PG&E, environmental organizations, unions and others, hinges on what some consider too long a time line. The utility gets nine more years, until their NRC operating licenses run out, for the reactors to continue challenging geology and clogging the grid with electricity that could be more cheaply and cleanly produced by renewables.
PG&E is also excused from performing a long overdue study of the environmental impacts of their once-through cooling system that has been killing the natural habitat since it wiped out the once abundant abalone along its shore in the ‘70’s.
Others consider the deal a success, “Only nine more years of reactor operation; a blueprint for the future shutdown of all nukes!”
If it really does happen in nine years, and all goes well along the faults--despite production of tons more waste with nowhere to be put-- it may be, as Lt. Governor Gavin Newsome calls it, “the best deal we could get.”
But, we have seen this beast resurrect before, so we’ll be watching. There is a well funded pro-nuke movement forming trying to spin a “nukes are good” message touting low greenhouse gas emissions, framing concerns about radiation as alarmism, some claiming a little radiation is good for our health.
PG&E came to the conservation and renewables party late, kicking and screaming. As early as 2008 utilities were seeing severe cuts in demand they worried would last beyond the recession (WSJ). No capitalist market model accommodates conservation well. Solar and conservation take away their customers, jeopardizing investor profits. For many years, community groups like Women’s Energy Matters, advocating through the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), forced wasted energy out of PG&E wires and more renewables in to them. And communities throughout the service area have opted out of PG&E through Community Choice Aggregation (CCA’s), looking for cleaner power.
Along with other investor-owned utilities (IOU’s) across the country, PG&E has been working to gut net energy metering (NEM) and CCA’s, which have taken many terawatts of “product” out of its distribution lines and billions out of bank accounts--the real force that made them willing to negotiate the shutdown of Diablo Canyon. To counter the solar threat, PG&E had to jump in front of the parade and guide it to its power distribution infrastructure. What better way than the announced shutdown—on the Summer Solstice--of California’s last operating nuclear power reactors?
Solar rooftops and city scale local solar projects could, if done right, fuel small business growth, and make large transmission grids obsolete, or at least less necessary. Already, the Solar Energy Industry Association predicts 20,000 megawatts of installed solar in the next five years. PG&E can’t have that. Under deregulation, PG&E got the grid and certain generation assets, including Diablo Canyon, dams, natural gas plants and geysers, and other qualifying generators, including solar and wind, were allowed to sell power in to the grid. PG&E charges a fee for every watt carried, so conservation and rooftop solar are proven money losers. There is concern that PG&E will use the nine year time line to implement a portfolio of renewables that will shape the renewable energy markets in a way that undermines the appeal of rooftop solar.
According to New York Times, “During the first quarter of (2016) alone, at least 10 states were weighing or approving rate design measures that could undermine the economic appeal of home solar systems, according to data compiled by the North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center”. While Hawaii and Nevada have ended solar credits that made solar thrive in those states, Florida voters failed to get the 2/3 majority needed to pass a constitutional amendment that opponents feared would undermine solar in the Sunshine State. California’s PUC only tightened the loop a small bit, adding some non-bypassable hook up charges with promises of more to come after 2020, when the current deal runs out. California utilities have filed suit against the NEM ruling, which forces them to buy rooftop solar at higher prices.
In the signed memorandum for the shutdown of Diablo Canyon, the company has promised to use renewable energy, conservation and storage to replace 55% of the 2200 MW of power lost from the reactor shutdowns by 2031. Only half the reactors’ power needs to be replaced because so many people conserved, went solar or went CCA. Fifty-five percent is in line with the requirement in California Senate Bill 350 (SB350)—the Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act-- to replace half the state’s energy with renewables and conservation by 2030.
PG&E will also try to recoup approximately $2 billion to pay off the reactors while working hard to maintain a profit margin for investors, to the detriment, many feel, of more decentralized energy delivery models and small businesses. The deal is now before the CPUC for consideration, and no guarantee of approval.
The other big idea in the works, the proposed expansion of the California Grid is being challenged by mountain state coal interests and the Sierra Club, among others.
While challenging rooftop solar programs, net metering and Community Choice Aggregation, IOU’s are also moving forward on efforts ostensibly to gain access to more renewable (wind) energy in to the California electrical grid, but would move energy decisions out of state control.
California Independent Systems Operator (CALISO), who oversees the California grid, along with California Energy Commission (CEC) and the CPUC, have been working to implement a proposed grid expansion to encompass the windy Rocky Mountain States from Montana to New Mexico. This fits with a long held industry plan to merge local utilities to form regional grids. This takes control of utility grids out of state utility commissions and puts it in to the hands of Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in far away DC. California’s ban on imported coal energy would be overcome. There are reports that Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway is sniffing around PG&E. They already own much of the grid from Montana to New Mexico.
The expansion would include setting a timeline for replacement of coal fired power plants, which account for about 60% of the energy in some of the grids, with wind. One of the provisions would allow a short-term spike in coal fired energy in to our state grid in exchange for promised shrinking coal use in the future. Coal would eventually be replaced mainly with wind through the interconnected multi-state grid.
The process, set forth in SB350, was threatened after Wyoming legislators, who don’t want “a windmill on every ridge” producing energy for export to Oregon, Washington and California, and angry over California’s refusal to allow Wyoming coal shipments to China through the port of Oakland, introduced a bill that would have tripled the nation’s only tax on wind energy from $1 to $3 per kilowatt hour. It was narrowly defeated this past September.
Discourse continues on governance, a big can of worms full of who rules and how questions. It is a fight for control of a huge market, and investor owned utilities (IOU’s) in California own the means of distribution for energy produced from afar. They have the inside edge and clear self interest in dampening distributed solar rooftop generation, which, it is estimated, could provide 70% of the state’s power if fully utilized.
The issue comes down to Socialism 1A, “Owning the Means of Production”. “Workers” can now own solar arrays and never have to pay a capitalist again for energy. They can even get a return on their investment; a profit. Or, they can unite in a CCA and purchase clean power as a co-op.
To now, energy has been produced by industry and sold as a commodity. That paradigm is shifting as utilities find there is more mostly non-renewable energy flowing in their lines than people are willing to buy, and cheaper solar, net metering and CCA’s make more alternatives available. As the emerging energy landscape develops, we must work to see the gains made are protected and expanded.
Don Eichelberger
Abalone Alliance Safe Energy Clearinghouse/
Nuclear Free California, Shut down Nuclear Power
http://www.energy-net.org,
http://www.nuclearfreecal.org/nfcnet/
--Shutting Down Nuclear and Building Renewables; Easier Said than Done
As the state implements SB350, a season of energy compromise is being called for
Energy agencies and board rooms have been hopping since summer making plans to transform the California energy landscape as nothing has since energy deregulation in 1996 separated generation from distribution. Two big ideas in the works: one would incorporate California in to a Western Regional grid aimed at expanding access to wind power; the other would end nuclear power generation in California. Both are under siege from many directions.
The shut down of Diablo Canyon, negotiated between PG&E, environmental organizations, unions and others, hinges on what some consider too long a time line. The utility gets nine more years, until their NRC operating licenses run out, for the reactors to continue challenging geology and clogging the grid with electricity that could be more cheaply and cleanly produced by renewables.
PG&E is also excused from performing a long overdue study of the environmental impacts of their once-through cooling system that has been killing the natural habitat since it wiped out the once abundant abalone along its shore in the ‘70’s.
Others consider the deal a success, “Only nine more years of reactor operation; a blueprint for the future shutdown of all nukes!”
If it really does happen in nine years, and all goes well along the faults--despite production of tons more waste with nowhere to be put-- it may be, as Lt. Governor Gavin Newsome calls it, “the best deal we could get.”
But, we have seen this beast resurrect before, so we’ll be watching. There is a well funded pro-nuke movement forming trying to spin a “nukes are good” message touting low greenhouse gas emissions, framing concerns about radiation as alarmism, some claiming a little radiation is good for our health.
PG&E came to the conservation and renewables party late, kicking and screaming. As early as 2008 utilities were seeing severe cuts in demand they worried would last beyond the recession (WSJ). No capitalist market model accommodates conservation well. Solar and conservation take away their customers, jeopardizing investor profits. For many years, community groups like Women’s Energy Matters, advocating through the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC), forced wasted energy out of PG&E wires and more renewables in to them. And communities throughout the service area have opted out of PG&E through Community Choice Aggregation (CCA’s), looking for cleaner power.
Along with other investor-owned utilities (IOU’s) across the country, PG&E has been working to gut net energy metering (NEM) and CCA’s, which have taken many terawatts of “product” out of its distribution lines and billions out of bank accounts--the real force that made them willing to negotiate the shutdown of Diablo Canyon. To counter the solar threat, PG&E had to jump in front of the parade and guide it to its power distribution infrastructure. What better way than the announced shutdown—on the Summer Solstice--of California’s last operating nuclear power reactors?
Solar rooftops and city scale local solar projects could, if done right, fuel small business growth, and make large transmission grids obsolete, or at least less necessary. Already, the Solar Energy Industry Association predicts 20,000 megawatts of installed solar in the next five years. PG&E can’t have that. Under deregulation, PG&E got the grid and certain generation assets, including Diablo Canyon, dams, natural gas plants and geysers, and other qualifying generators, including solar and wind, were allowed to sell power in to the grid. PG&E charges a fee for every watt carried, so conservation and rooftop solar are proven money losers. There is concern that PG&E will use the nine year time line to implement a portfolio of renewables that will shape the renewable energy markets in a way that undermines the appeal of rooftop solar.
According to New York Times, “During the first quarter of (2016) alone, at least 10 states were weighing or approving rate design measures that could undermine the economic appeal of home solar systems, according to data compiled by the North Carolina Clean Energy Technology Center”. While Hawaii and Nevada have ended solar credits that made solar thrive in those states, Florida voters failed to get the 2/3 majority needed to pass a constitutional amendment that opponents feared would undermine solar in the Sunshine State. California’s PUC only tightened the loop a small bit, adding some non-bypassable hook up charges with promises of more to come after 2020, when the current deal runs out. California utilities have filed suit against the NEM ruling, which forces them to buy rooftop solar at higher prices.
In the signed memorandum for the shutdown of Diablo Canyon, the company has promised to use renewable energy, conservation and storage to replace 55% of the 2200 MW of power lost from the reactor shutdowns by 2031. Only half the reactors’ power needs to be replaced because so many people conserved, went solar or went CCA. Fifty-five percent is in line with the requirement in California Senate Bill 350 (SB350)—the Clean Energy and Pollution Reduction Act-- to replace half the state’s energy with renewables and conservation by 2030.
PG&E will also try to recoup approximately $2 billion to pay off the reactors while working hard to maintain a profit margin for investors, to the detriment, many feel, of more decentralized energy delivery models and small businesses. The deal is now before the CPUC for consideration, and no guarantee of approval.
The other big idea in the works, the proposed expansion of the California Grid is being challenged by mountain state coal interests and the Sierra Club, among others.
While challenging rooftop solar programs, net metering and Community Choice Aggregation, IOU’s are also moving forward on efforts ostensibly to gain access to more renewable (wind) energy in to the California electrical grid, but would move energy decisions out of state control.
California Independent Systems Operator (CALISO), who oversees the California grid, along with California Energy Commission (CEC) and the CPUC, have been working to implement a proposed grid expansion to encompass the windy Rocky Mountain States from Montana to New Mexico. This fits with a long held industry plan to merge local utilities to form regional grids. This takes control of utility grids out of state utility commissions and puts it in to the hands of Federal Energy Regulatory Commission in far away DC. California’s ban on imported coal energy would be overcome. There are reports that Warren Buffet’s Berkshire Hathaway is sniffing around PG&E. They already own much of the grid from Montana to New Mexico.
The expansion would include setting a timeline for replacement of coal fired power plants, which account for about 60% of the energy in some of the grids, with wind. One of the provisions would allow a short-term spike in coal fired energy in to our state grid in exchange for promised shrinking coal use in the future. Coal would eventually be replaced mainly with wind through the interconnected multi-state grid.
The process, set forth in SB350, was threatened after Wyoming legislators, who don’t want “a windmill on every ridge” producing energy for export to Oregon, Washington and California, and angry over California’s refusal to allow Wyoming coal shipments to China through the port of Oakland, introduced a bill that would have tripled the nation’s only tax on wind energy from $1 to $3 per kilowatt hour. It was narrowly defeated this past September.
Discourse continues on governance, a big can of worms full of who rules and how questions. It is a fight for control of a huge market, and investor owned utilities (IOU’s) in California own the means of distribution for energy produced from afar. They have the inside edge and clear self interest in dampening distributed solar rooftop generation, which, it is estimated, could provide 70% of the state’s power if fully utilized.
The issue comes down to Socialism 1A, “Owning the Means of Production”. “Workers” can now own solar arrays and never have to pay a capitalist again for energy. They can even get a return on their investment; a profit. Or, they can unite in a CCA and purchase clean power as a co-op.
To now, energy has been produced by industry and sold as a commodity. That paradigm is shifting as utilities find there is more mostly non-renewable energy flowing in their lines than people are willing to buy, and cheaper solar, net metering and CCA’s make more alternatives available. As the emerging energy landscape develops, we must work to see the gains made are protected and expanded.
Don Eichelberger
Abalone Alliance Safe Energy Clearinghouse/
Nuclear Free California, Shut down Nuclear Power
http://www.energy-net.org,
http://www.nuclearfreecal.org/nfcnet/
For more information:
http://www.energy-net.org
Add Your Comments
We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!
Donate
$140.00 donated
in the past month
Get Involved
If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.
Publish
Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.
Topics
More
Search Indybay's Archives
Advanced Search
►
▼
IMC Network