Search
January 28, 2025

Posted on

USEA Forum Charts New Focus on ‘All-of-the-above’ Energy Policies

WASHINGTON, D.C. ― Karen Harbert, CEO of the American Gas Association, was the first to speak at the U.S. Energy Association’s 21st Annual State of the Energy Industry Forum and set a jubilant tone for the fossil fuel leaders at the Jan. 23 event at the National Press Club. 

“We’re the cool kids now,” Harbert said. “We have to go first.” 

An ongoing cold snap in the Midwest and East Coast has meant record use of natural gas, she said.  

“We are the biggest part of the power generation fleet right now. We’re over 40%, and that’s going to continue to grow with the onset of data centers, advanced manufacturing and strategic industries. So, gas is back. … We’re popular, we’re affordable, we’re efficient and we’re clean.” 

Coming three days after President Donald Trump began his second term with a flurry of executive orders promoting a major increase in U.S. fossil fuel production, the event reflected the quickly shifting landscape of national energy policy and the resulting shift in industry priorities and narratives. (See What is and isn’t in Trump’s National Energy Emergency Order.) 

All-of-the-above strategies for meeting the exponential demand growth from artificial intelligence and megawatt-guzzling hyperscale data centers were a key theme at the day-long event, as was the desire for “durable,” bipartisan legislation to streamline and accelerate permitting.  

No one mentioned climate change, or even Biden’s signature climate legislation, the Inflation Reduction Act, at least not by name.  

Like Harbert, the CEOs of all the major fossil fuel trade associations exuberantly staked out their claims as preferred providers of the reliable, affordable, “clean” (or at least “cleaner”) power that data centers and U.S. consumers need. Leaders of renewable energy groups ― solar, hydropower and nuclear ― argued for their essential role in the diverse, carbon-free energy mix the high-tech hyperscalers want.  

Mike Sommers, CEO of the American Petroleum Institute, began his pitch by noting that no one on the forum’s first panel had mentioned the words “energy transition.” 

“We’re at a moment today where we’re transitioning from the energy transition to energy reality, and energy reality is that all of us are going to be using a heck of a lot more energy in the future, particularly in the developing world,” Sommers said. 

The U.S. is best positioned to meet that global demand because of its “strong regulatory structure,” he said. “We produce oil and gas cleaner than any other country in the world.” 

Michelle Bloodworth, CEO of America’s Power, the coal industry’s trade association, talked up the value of coal’s ability to deliver power in extreme weather events “because it has 90 days of onsite fuel. It’s hard to beat this onsite fuel when it’s really, really cold.” 

But even Bloodworth said support for coal “doesn’t mean that we don’t support wind and solar. Again, we need them all. We need to keep all the existing resources that we have until all this new generation” comes online. 

Renewables Retrench

Jason Grumet, CEO of the American Clean Power Association, led the retrenchment of renewables, dissociating his organization from former President Joe Biden’s goal of a 100% decarbonized grid by 2035. It was, he said, “a narrative that was not our own.” He and others pointed to a combination of natural gas and renewables as a likely and pragmatic way forward. 

“The notion that molecules and electrons actually have political affiliation” needs to be set aside, Grumet said. The challenge and opportunity before the industry is to “show what it’s going to take to meet this demand in the time frame we need it.”  

“Every technology has strengths and weaknesses,” Grumet said. “The ability to build renewables fast is one of those strengths; intermittency is one of those weaknesses, and that’s why we have to be combined … to come up with a rational policy.” 

Abigail Ross Hopper, CEO of the Solar Energy Industries Association, said she would not support a 100% solar-powered electric system primarily because the U.S. should not be dependent on any one source of power.  

Like Grumet, she talked about the speed and scalability of installation that solar brings to the table, but also the reliability benefits of distributed as opposed to centralized generation.  

Distributed “makes a ton of sense” for addressing congestion on the grid, Hopper said. “Adding solar plus storage, other kinds of storage … that gives the grid more resiliency; that gives so [many] different ways of getting around outages. That allows consumers, if you have [solar] at your home, to be more secure.” 

Rich Powell, CEO of the Clean Energy Buyers Association, stressed the role that data centers and other large energy consumers in his organization now play in the energy landscape, with their commitments to carbon emissions-free energy. 

CEBA’s definition of emissions-free covers a broad range of technologies, from wind and solar to carbon capture and sequestration, making the group’s collective economic impact potentially significant, Powell said. 

USEA

Talking natural gas and solar at the USEA forum (from left): Mark Menezes, USEA, Dena Wiggins, Natural Gas Supply Association; Abigail Ross Hopper, SEIA; and Fred Hutchison, LNG Allies. | © RTO Insider LLC 

CEBA’s 400 members represent about $22 billion in market capitalization and 10% of all U.S. energy demand, providing significant demand and market signals, he said. An upcoming CEBA report will “sum up all the remaining demand signals for carbon emissions-free electricity in the United States alone, as part of an attempt to help grid planners who are thinking about new transmission that would be required to move new electrons to sources,” he said.  

Transmission expansion and flexibility will be essential, said Arshad Mansoor, CEO of the Electric Power Research Institute.  

“The changes we have seen in 12 months, we have not seen for the last 100 years,” Mansoor said, calling the speed of demand growth “unprecedented.” Borrowing Trump’s rallying cry, he said, the industry’s response must be to “build, baby, build,” but to do so in a smart way. 

“There is 15 to 20% of [grid] capacity that is there today that can be unleashed if we can find some [way] for resources like data centers to back up the grid for 1% of the time,” Mansoor said. “Fifteen to 20% of the grid is supporting electric demand for 87 hours in a year; so, we see flexibility as a huge need.” 

Fixing NEPA and ‘Overreaching’ EPA rules

Building on the impetus of Trump’s executive orders, both fossil fuel and renewable energy leaders continue to call on Congress for “durable” permitting reform, though their legislative priorities vary. 

Dena Wiggins, CEO of the Natural Gas Supply Association, said, “fixing NEPA has got to be Job 1.” What that means in her view is that environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act should be “procedural … not outcome-determinative.” The law should be interpreted as not requiring “an agency to take a particular action as a result of [its] analysis,” she said. 

Fred Hutchison, CEO of LNG Allies, wants to rein in NEPA-related litigation. “We have to stop the ability of any litigant who wants to attack a licensed project,” Hutchinson said. “Whether it’s a pipeline, whether it’s an LNG facility, when you’ve gotten your licenses and a contract, all of the appeals are settled.” 

Such reforms must be “legally durable,” so courts cannot put a hold on a licensed project that is under construction, he said. 

For Maria Korsnick, CEO of the Nuclear Energy Institute, the priority is preparing the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for the next generation of reactors and cutting permitting times from five or more years to 18 to 20 months. 

“What [the NRC is] really comfortable with are these large reactors; they understand the regulation around them,” Korsnick said. “But the new [reactors] that are coming … they’re going to come in all shapes and sizes and run in different ways.  

“So, we want them to get better at saying, ‘I understand this design; let me target the regulation just to this design.’ … Especially if it’s a small modular reactor, even a smaller micro reactor, we want them to sort of take a fresh look.”   

After permitting reform, the fossil fuel industry will continue to push for regulatory repeals and rollbacks that Trump has called for in his executive order on Unleashing American Energy. 

Bloodworth specifically called for action on “overreaching EPA regulations,” including the rules on power plant emissions, mercury emissions and the “Good Neighbor rule” requiring states to submit plans for limiting interstate emissions.  

Repeatedly raising concerns about reliability disruptions and price increases, Bloodworth said, “The EPA should immediately stop implementing those rules. … They need to look at different interpretations of those rules” and replace them with “sensible environmental policies.” 

Rolling back regulations, however carefully targeted, can’t ensure community buy-in or prevent opposition at the local level, which often presents some of the toughest obstacles to getting projects approved and built. Hopper pointed to county-level moratoria and bans on new solar projects as an example of the need to ensure NEPA reform includes “stakeholder engagement and building an understanding of the assets and the benefits that are coming to communities.” 

As the number of new projects waiting for permits and interconnection continues to grow, “we can’t just, like, shove more stuff through the system,” she said. 

IRA Tax Credits

While the IRA’s clean energy tax credits were not specifically targeted in Trump’s executive order on energy, they are definitely in congressional crosshairs as Republican lawmakers start looking for funding cuts to offset extending the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act.  

The House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee recently circulated a 50-page list of potential funding cuts and savings, with a repeal of “green energy tax credits” the first of dozens of proposed changes to tax regulations. Such IRA rollbacks could provide an estimated $796 billion in savings over 10 years, according to the list.  

The list also proposes cuts to the 45Q, 45U and 45Z tax credits for, respectively, carbon capture, nuclear and tech-neutral clean technology. Without providing detail, the list says the cuts would “reduce government intervention in the energy industry that props up the green energy sector and distorts market competition” and save $404.7 billion over 10 years.  

But congressional Republicans may face challenges here as the leaders of industry trade groups at the USEA forum said they will work to protect tax credits that benefit their members.  

In addition to Bloodworth’s support for 45Q, Pat Vincent-Collawn, interim CEO of the Edison Electric Institute, said “energy tax credits are driving innovation, creating good American jobs and economic opportunity, and helping electric companies [meet] the rapidly growing demand for electricity while keeping customer bills as low as possible. It is important that lawmakers protect these tax credits.” 

Maintaining tax credits that support clean tech supply chains was another point of agreement. Hopper pointed to the massive buildout of solar manufacturing in the U.S. since passage of the IRA. “We have gone from very little solar manufacturing capacity in the United States to, by the end of this year, being able to produce enough solar modules to provide for our entire domestic need.” 

CEBA’s Powell made a direct connection between maintaining the tax credits and another of Trump’s top priorities, keeping electric bills low. “The marginal cost of new generation sets the price for everything,” he said. “If you effectively increase the price of that new generation by removing the incentives currently available to it, we’re going to see all electricity prices rise.” 

Posted on

Voltus Files Complaint to Hit Brakes on MISO’s Stepped-up DR Testing

Voltus has filed a complaint with FERC against MISO, alleging the RTO’s “11th-hour” changes in testing and contract proof requirements ahead of the spring capacity auctions will harm demand response resources and affect rates (EL25-52).

In its Jan. 24 complaint, Voltus said MISO essentially is imposing “new terms and conditions” on DR by cracking down on power tests and requiring more detail in contracts. It said the RTO had “moved the goalposts” after testing deadlines passed and with just 45 days to go before the March 1 auction registration deadline.

Voltus asked FERC to deem MISO’s stricter testing and contractual requirements unenforceable because they stand to affect rates and had not been filed with FERC for approval. It said that without action, all the 450 MW of load-modifying resources (LMRs) it intends to offer in the 2025/26 capacity auction is at risk of disqualification. The company requested that FERC fast-track its complaint and respond no later than Feb. 14.

Voltus argued MISO performed an about-face in late December when it announced to market participants via email that “real power tests” would be limited in duration to LMRs’ individual stated response times. That means an LMR with a six-hour response time would have a maximum of six hours to demonstrate it could scale back usage. Before then, Voltus said it was MISO’s practice to allow DR resources a full day to drop load by at least 50% for real power testing.

But that wasn’t the only deviation from MISO’s recent testing practices, Voltus told FERC. The RTO announced at the Resource Adequacy Subcommittee’s (RASC) meeting Jan. 15 that it would require all LMRs using a firm service level threshold to measure reductions to show in testing that they can cut use to that level and that the reduction be at least 50% of the LMR’s registered value. (See Following DR Exploitation, MISO Announces Stiffer Requirements Before Capacity Auction.)

Finally, MISO announced that market participants must be able to show that their LMR contracts are active for all seasons their resources offer their services. Contracts themselves must detail response time, how the LMR achieves demand reduction, and specify how many megawatts or to what firm service level end-use customers agree to curtail, the RTO said.

MISO staff said they were forced to double down on existing testing requirements after a handful of companies were caught manipulating the DR market in recent FERC investigations. Staff at the time said MISO’s testing requirements are already on the books and that it was merely renewing its enforcement.

Voltus itself recently agreed to pay a $18 million civil penalty after FERC investigated the company for reportedly falsifying registrations and overstating capacity from 2016 to 2020. (See Voltus Agrees to $18M Fine to Settle DR Tariff Violations in MISO.)

MISO’s tariff instructs market participants who wish to register LMRs to conduct real power tests if they have not previously responded to an emergency. The tariff also requires market participants to have “contractual rights” with their resources.

However, Voltus argued that MISO has not defined a “real power test” in its tariff or Business Practices Manuals. The company said it has seen efforts to define DR testing in stakeholder committees repeatedly “fizzle out.”

Because MISO and stakeholders have never settled on a definition, the company argued, FERC should act to make sure market participants registering LMRs who relied on the RTO’s typical guidance in recent years for the 2025/26 auction are treated fairly.

MISO’s late December email came after registration for the 2025/26 planning year had already begun and days before LMRs’ testing deadline, Voltus said. And it wasn’t until the Jan. 15 RASC meeting — after the LMR testing deadline passed — that MISO announced it would require aggregators of retail customers demonstrate “contractual control” of their demand resources and resubmit registrations that lack details, it said.

“MISO’s beyond-the-11th-hour changes to these requirements will have catastrophic impacts on market participants,” Voltus said, adding that it’s now impossible for market participants to retest LMRs while still meeting the RTO’s original end-of-the-year deadline for testing.

Voltus argued MISO’s seemingly new contract specifications are discriminatory because aggregators now are held to a different standard than utilities. While aggregators must submit the more detailed contracts, utilities must show only that customers are enrolled in their DR programs. Voltus argued MISO did not attempt to explain the disparate treatment.

The company also said it’s “unlikely” that contracts between aggregators and their customers “will include all the exact information MISO is now (for the first time) mandating be included.”

“As a result of these changes, all of the demand resources Voltus intended to register as LMRs to participate in the [Planning Resource Auction] for the 2025/2026 planning year may be disqualified entirely,” Voltus said, explaining that “none” of its customer contracts contains all the data MISO wants. It said that as of Jan. 24, it’s still waiting for MISO to confirm whether it will accept additional documentation detailing curtailment plans that it has submitted.

“While Voltus has curtailment plans for each of its customers, those curtailment plans are not codified in the contract. Similarly, while some of Voltus’ customer contracts specify the [firm service level] to which the customer commits to drop, in many cases that information may be contained elsewhere (e.g., in an email confirmation or other document extraneous to the contract),” Voltus said.

Voltus said that of its 450 MW of LMRs, 112.7 MW are from those that on paper no longer pass MISO’s real power testing requirements, either because of new time span limits or the firm service level stipulation. The company said it communicated testing requirements to customers using RTO rules in the past four planning years.

“MISO’s 11th-hour change in methodology therefore forced Voltus to choose between two terrible options: (1) not register these demand resources, losing revenues and failing to satisfy its commitments to these customers; or (2) register such demand resources as ‘untested,’” the company wrote.

Voltus told FERC it was forced to submit the 112.7 MW as “untested,” which it said will increase its potential penalty exposure by $3.16 million per market dispatch and up its collateral requirement by $270,480.

The company predicted that “hundreds of megawatts of demand resources” will be unable to register to participate in MISO’s seasonal capacity auctions by the March 1 registration deadline. It warned of “cascading impacts” where aggregators and other market participants will be forced to find replacement capacity or default on bilateral contracts.

Voltus said that while it does not oppose MISO’s attempts to strengthen its requirements, the grid operator should not be allowed to “unilaterally impose new requirements on market participants with no basis in the tariff.”

MISO told RTO Insider via email that it is “reviewing the complaint to determine our response” but declined to comment further.

Posted on

Western Regulators Clarifying Their Role in Markets+

Arizona Corporation Commissioner Nick Myers, chair of the Markets+ State Committee, said Jan. 24 he’s drafting a response to FERC’s requested compliance filing to clarify some of the key points raised in the commission’s approval of the day-ahead market’s tariff (ER24-1658). 

Myers, vice chair of the ACC, told the MSC his letter will explain the regulatory group’s structure and how it will be funded by SPP. The MSC comprises regulators from most Western states who provide their perspective on Markets+’s development and operations. 

“I think this reply would be more of an informal response, as it is a point of clarification other than actual comments, but open to feedback from you all,” Myers told the MSC. “I do think having as many as MSC members as possible behind that would be beneficial and helpful and also just keeps everyone on the same page with where these discussions are at moving forward.” 

FERC conditionally approved the market’s tariff Jan. 16. The commission found the tariff still was “insufficiently clear” on some points and directed a compliance filing due Feb. 15. (See SPP Markets+ Tariff Wins FERC Approval.) 

Commissioner Mark Christie (now chair) and Commissioner David Rosner filed a joint concurrence to FERC’s order, expressing their concern with governance and ensuring “robust” state involvement in the market’s development. They urged SPP to ensure the MSC, and its Regional State Committee in the Eastern Interconnection, can provide adequate independent staff support and the means to maintain dedicated staff, similar to the structures of the Organization of PJM States Inc. and Organization of MISO States. 

The Western Interstate Energy Board currently serves as the MSC’s staff support. WIEB’s Gia Anguiano, who supports the MSC, said SPP staff will visit Christie and Rosner in Washington, D.C. this week to discuss their concurrence in a “little bit more detail.” She said there also have been discussions to have the two commissioners participate in an MSC meeting. 

“[We] really want to get to the root of their concerns around [their concurrence] and see what we can do to further address it,” Anguiano said. 

FERC Commissioner Judy Chang issued a separate concurrence that noted the tariff leaves some uncertainties about key market design details, such as transmission capability rules, greenhouse gas pricing and potential seams issues, between Markets+ and CAISO’s competing Extended Day-ahead Market. 

“I think the biggest point in Commissioner Chang’s concurrence is just really to make sure that the market is operating at its greatest potential and for the consumer’s benefit,” Anguiano said. 

SPP has said the compliance filing will require adding six sentences to and deleting one from the 650-page tariff. (See SPP Markets+ Tariff a ‘Home run’, Staff Says.) 

Posted on

ERCOT Fills out Board with 2 New Directors

ERCOT announced Jan. 27 that it filled two vacancies on its Board of Directors, bringing it to a full complement of eight independent members.

The Texas grid operator said its Board Selection Committee tabbed Alex Hernandez and Sig Cornelius to serve three-year terms, effective immediately. They replace former Chair Paul Foster and Director Bob Flexon, both of whom left in 2024. (See ERCOT Board Chair Foster Steps Down.)

Alex Hernandez | Talen Energy

Hernandez is the founder and CEO of Cumulus Data, the first hyperscale data center platform directly connected to carbon-free nuclear power. He brings with him 20 years of experience in business formation, operations, executive leadership and strategic advisory roles, most recently serving as Talen Energy’s CEO. Hernandez also served as TerraForm Power’s CFO, a board member for the Nuclear Energy Institute’s Executive Committee and a managing director at Goldman Sachs.

He holds bachelor’s degrees in economics from both Rice University and the London School of Economics, and an MBA from Columbia University.

Sig Cornelius | Freeport LNG

Cornelius has spent 45 years in several senior management positions, most recently as president of Freeport LNG Development. Previously, he was with ConocoPhillips, retiring as CFO in 2010.

He has a bachelor’s degree from Iowa State University and master’s degrees from both Purdue University and Stanford University.

The ERCOT board includes four ex officio and nonvoting members to provide an in-person sounding board for member companies: the CEO of ERCOT, the public counsel of the Texas Office of Public Utility Counsel, the chair of the Public Utility Commission and a PUC commissioner designated by the PUC chair.

All board members are from Texas, a change made after the February 2021 winter storm.

Posted on

Generation Developers Ask for Scoring System on MISO Queue Fast Track

Groups of generation owners and developers have asked MISO to adopt a queue fast lane only as a last resort and employ a more limited process that involves scoring criteria to gain entry.

MISO intends to open an express lane in its interconnection queue beginning in June through the end of 2028 for state-designated generation projects that meet resource adequacy targets. The bypass would be meant for projects that can reach commercial operation in three to five years. (See MISO Tells Board RA Fast Lane in Interconnection Queue is a Must and MISO Outlines Plan on Fast-track Queue for Resource Adequacy.)

However, the Coalition of Midwest Power Producers (COMPP) said MISO should establish a screening process for the fast lane based on project readiness and limit the process to just two accelerated studies — one in 2025 and one in 2026. The two studies should be open to all interconnection customers, independent power producers and load-serving entities alike, COMPP said.

Speaking at a Jan. 22 Planning Advisory Committee meeting, COMPP representative Travis Stewart said MISO’s expedited process as proposed creates the possibility of discriminatory treatment in the interconnection queue. This is especially a concern, he said, because designated resource adequacy projects might get first dibs on some of the billions of dollars in freshly constructed transmission capacity MISO has approved in recent years.

Stewart suggested MISO introduce a scoring system to permit projects in the express lane to make sure it’s accepting “commercially mature” projects that meet resource adequacy needs. He said project proposals could earn points based on developers’ ability to show that projects will serve resource adequacy needs, the completeness of an engineering design and equipment procurement, and that projects have been selected through either regulators or load-serving entities’ competitive solicitation. He said the burden to show project need and readiness would be on developers, with MISO to simply “trust and then verify” information from developers and regulators.

Stewart said COMPP’s idea, which he dubbed the Alternative Resource Connection Queue, could accept 50 of the highest-scoring projects apiece in 2025 and 2026 to proceed with faster studies aimed at interconnection agreements within 90 days.

“COMPP is concerned that an unchecked, uncapped [express] queue that can continue in perpetuity will likely mimic the ‘lane expansion’ phenomena in which creating new highway lanes does not improve the flow of traffic but only creates more lanes with more traffic,” Stewart said.

Some stakeholders said that asking MISO to institute more evaluation and scoring criteria will inherently slow down and convolute a queue lane designed to be faster.

“We’d rather have some small hurdles set up at the beginning to demonstrate commercial maturity … than have MISO dedicate their engineering expertise to study a project that ultimately doesn’t get built,” Stewart said, adding that “two weeks of evaluation upfront is better than four months” of ultimately wasted analysis.

NextEra Energy’s Erin Murphy, representing a group of MISO generation developers, said MISO’s proposal raises fundamental discrimination and undue preference concerns. She agreed with Stewart that a fast lane should be open to independent power producers and load-serving entities alike.

“We are concerned that the most constructable projects and the ones most able to address RA concerns won’t get online under this process,” Murphy said.

Murphy said while a limited fast track might ultimately prove necessary, MISO should focus first on improving operations of the existing queue to reduce the backlog. She said MISO should increase staffing and allow time for its recently approved queue regulations with FERC to take hold before it establishes specialized processing.

“We’re of the firm belief that the volume currently in the queue is more than enough to meet projected resource adequacy needs,” Murphy said. She argued that MISO first should take stock of projects already in the queue to ascertain which can meet the footprint’s resource adequacy needs. She implied MISO is establishing a fast lane while disregarding viable projects in the regular queue that already have been vetted.

“There’s a heck of a lot of value in the queue that’s locked up,” Murphy argued.

Murphy said if an imminent resource adequacy gap persists after that, any express lane should come equipped with a scoring system “so the best projects come online in a timely manner.” She also said a fast lane option shouldn’t “erode” the value of the existing queue.

But WEC Energy Group’s Chris Plante said identifying resource adequacy needs is a subjective exercise today.

“It’s not as simple as meeting a reserve margin. It used to be that simple,” Plante said. He said today’s variable requirements in seasons, the sloped demand curve now in place in MISO capacity auctions and more volatile accreditation values year-over-year complicate the picture.

“There’s a tremendous amount of uncertainty in determining resource adequacy needs,” Plante said.

Murphy agreed and suggested resource adequacy needs could begin with states articulating them and then MISO validating them.

MISO’s Andy Witmeier said MISO is delaying its FERC filing into mid-March to consider stakeholders’ suggestions. He said MISO would return to the February Planning Advisory Committee to present a final proposal.

However, Witmeier said the point of the fast track is to get projects online quickly as load grows. He said MISO’s new queue regulations approved in January 2024 — which include higher fees, automatic withdrawal penalty costs and stricter evidence of land use — will take a few years to bear results.

“We’re facing a new phenomenon with spot loads,” Witmeier explained.

Witmeier confirmed that projects that elect to drop out of the regular queue to join the fast-tracked queue will face automatic withdrawal penalties.

MISO also plans to collect higher fees from fast-lane developers than in the regular queue. It will start with a $100,000 nonrefundable upfront fee and then a milestone payment of $24,000/MW. Customers in the regular queue pay $8,000/MW.

Clean Grid Alliance’s David Sapper argued that MISO’s proposal still appears to “violate” FERC’s mandate on open access and nondiscriminatory treatment.

Minnesota Public Utilities Commissioner Joe Sullivan said he heard stakeholders offer fair recommendations to MISO.

“I think we have to find a way to treat the existing queue reasonably and fairly,” Sullivan said.

Sustainable FERC Project’s Natalie McIntire said it seemed MISO wasn’t requiring enough proof that projects are ready to embark on construction. She said MISO might consider requiring engineering designs, fuel contracts if applicable and their permitting progress. McIntire said there’s “strong stakeholder support” to ensure projects will be able to meet demand in the timeframe MISO needs them.

MISO so far requires details like synchronization and commercial operation dates, interconnection facilities finish dates, generator output, manufacturer and model numbers, fuel type and facility and transformer data.

Posted on

NYISO Presents Preliminary FERC Order 1920 Plan to Stakeholders

NYISO on Jan. 21 presented stakeholders with its preliminary proposal for complying with FERC Order 1920, giving a first glimpse into how the ISO may conduct a long-term transmission planning process.

The ISO would repurpose elements of its current Economic Planning and Public Policy planning processes while retaining reliability studies like the Short-Term Assessment of Reliability and Reliability Needs Assessment as separate processes. The System & Resource Outlook would serve as the “core assessment and analysis element” of the new process.

“It’s a tough balance,” Yachi Lin, director of system planning for NYISO, told the Transmission Planning Advisory Subcommittee. “FERC does give us options on how to comply with Order 1920. We either have a multi-value [process], [with] everything going into one batch, or we decide how to repurpose our current processes, or we develop a new one.”

Lin said adding a fourth process specifically for Order 1920 would be overwhelming.

“That’s why we landed here,” Lin said. “Let’s repurpose, leverage, our existing success and experience in economic and public policy planning processes.”

NYISO would also adapt its current solution solicitation, evaluation and selection process into the new long-term process. This would incorporate the seven categories of benefits that FERC specified in the order.

Order 1920 also requires a 20-year horizon for transmission planning with cost allocation for projects that ensures that only customers who receive benefits pay for the projects. The order mandates that new grid enhancing technologies and previously passed-over projects be considered.

With Order 1920-A, FERC gave state governments more of a say in the new long-term processes, granting “relevant state agencies” the opportunity to propose alternative cost-allocation methods for long-term regional transmission facilities. (See FERC Order 1920-A Wins Approval with Accommodations to States.)

Several stakeholders asked about why NYISO had only included the Department of Public Service and Long Island Power Authority as “relevant state entities.”

“We looked at this issue in connection with a meeting around cost allocation options,” said Liz Grisaru, senior adviser for policy at the DPS. “And it appears to us anyway that a ‘relevant state entity’ is either a state permitting authority or a state entity with the authority to set rates.”

One stakeholder pointed out that New York Power Authority sets rates for its communities “all the time,” and it was not clear why it was excluded from being a relevant state entity for the purposes of Order 1920. Another stakeholder chimed in that which state entities qualified should be better clarified before “we get too far down the road.”

Challenges

The commission required that transmission providers conduct their long-term planning processes every three years. The new process requires NYISO to incorporate more factors, develop more scenarios and include more evaluation metrics than those in the Outlook and Public Policy Transmission Process combined, Lin said.

If the Public Policy and Outlook processes were simply combined without expanding the scope mandated by Order 1920, it would take about four years of NYISO-only work, she said. “We’ve got to think of ways, creative ways, to try to squeeze the time into three years,” she said.

In addition, the New York Public Service Commission will still play a role in the new process. She noted that the involvement of the PSC would add processing time, particularly with the notice and timing rules of the State Administrative Procedure Act.

Lin said that some time could be saved by soliciting data from stakeholders and relevant state entities that might affect long-term transmission needs. In effect, this would replace the biennial Public Policy Transmission Need solicitation.

Chris Casey of the Natural Resources Defense Council said that he was worried about the separation of the reliability processes and the new planning process. He said that in the past, the reliability planning assumptions had typically been conservative.

“I guess what I’m worried about is having a separate reliability process identifying a longer-term reliability need and potentially acting on it through that process without understanding if we should be expanding what the solution might be,” Casey said.

Lin replied that the objectives of the reliability planning process and the new long-term process were different. Reliability planning is about making sure that there’s enough energy and capacity. She said that short-term reliability solutions should be used as inputs into the long-term situation.

“There are opportunities to make sure that we link them up together,” Lin said. “I do not envision that we will be in a vacuum, only addressing long-term reliability needs without understanding [short-term] reliability.”

Lin asked stakeholders and state entities for feedback on the preliminary proposal. NYISO is aiming to submit its compliance filing on regional planning requirements by June 12 and another filing on interregional requirements by Aug. 12.

Posted on

MISO IMM Warns of Operational Difficulties with Growing Solar Fleet

CARMEL, Ind. — MISO’s Independent Market Monitor said ramping needs north of 10 GW are becoming increasingly common and MISO should expect challenges ahead as its solar fleet expands. 

MISO IMM Carrie Milton said in analyzing winter operations data so far, MISO’s typical wintertime dual-peaking load pattern in the morning and evening is occurring when its growing solar fleet is unavailable. She said the disparity has become more pronounced as the number of solar panels in the footprint has more than doubled.  

MISO set an all-time solar record of 8.272 GW on Jan. 13, where panels accounted for about 10% of total generation. By comparison, January 2024’s solar peak was almost 3.3 GW.    

On that day, Milton said the RTO had a top 17-GW ramping need, with a 9-GW jump occurring in just one hour as not only solar, but wind generation dropped off.  

“The good news is MISO managed it very well. You probably didn’t even notice it,” Milton said at the Jan. 16 Market Subcommittee meeting. She added that routine pricing that day belied the challenges in the operating room.  

Milton said such challenges will become a more common feature for MISO control room operators. RTO leadership has said its solar capacity will grow to 12 GW before March. (See MISO Estimates Solar Fleet will be 12 GW by Winter’s End.)  

“We continue to set new records with solar,” MISO’s John Harmon acknowledged at the Jan. 23 Reliability Subcommittee.  

Load Shed Drills Announced

MISO signaled it expects a more fraught operating environment by announcing it will conduct tabletop load shed exercises over 2025, hoping to bring in not only load-serving entities, but also regulators and other stakeholders.  

Speaking at a Jan. 23 Reliability Subcommittee meeting, MISO South Manager of Reliability Coordination Jeff Sundvick said MISO’s “ever-evolving energy landscape” and “ever-changing weather” is “putting unprecedented stress on our grid.” He said MISO would mimic seasonal load shed and extended system loss scenarios in the exercises.  

During MISO’s Board Week in December, executives confirmed they would pursue large-scale load shedding drills among its membership.  

Sundvick said MISO doesn’t know some of its members’ “specific capabilities for demand reduction.” He said MISO hopes to standardize some communication through the drills and “simulate high-pressure scenarios.” When it issues load shed instructions, it’s up to the RTO’s local balancing authorities and transmission operators to identify specific loads to shed while prioritizing critical infrastructure. 

“We don’t want to learn of bottlenecks in the heat of battle. We want to learn about them beforehand,” Sundvick said.  

MISO Eludes Max Gen Event Thus Far

Recent months have proven little challenge for MISO, which recorded 75-GW average demand and a 95-GW peak in December, a few gigawatts higher than December 2023’s totals. Peak demand wasn’t anywhere near the almost 107 GW peak set in December 2022.  

Prices rose year over year to an average of $31/MWh, up from $25/MWh in December 2023. Natural gas prices inched upward from their stable $2/MMBtu over most of 2024 to $3/MMBtu. 

MISO also weathered a hard freeze stretching into coastal MISO South using just cold weather alerts and conservative operation instructions Jan. 20 through Jan. 22. The storm dumped a record 10 inches of snow in some parts of New Orleans. The RTO also employed a cold weather alert and conservative operations for the South region only to manage a cold front Jan. 6-9. The cold snaps likely produced a winter peak.  

Harmon said despite back-to-back winter storms in January, “everything performed as expected from the MISO perspective.”  

Ahead of the arctic bouts, MISO asked all members to evaluate equipment outage schedules, fuel availability and staffing levels. 

MISO operations went off without a hitch in November, bringing lower prices and a lower peak than last year.  

The footprint averaged a 70-GW average load in November, in line with the previous three years. The month’s 81-GW peak load Nov. 21 was smaller than November 2023’s 89-GW peak.  

Though coal and gas prices were unchanged year-over-year at $2/MMBtu, the month’s average locational marginal price slid to $23/MWh, lower than November 2023’s $28/MWh.  

MISO experienced the lowest generation outages in November in four years, averaging 47 GW daily, a 2-GW reduction over 2023. 

Posted on

NextEra, GE Vernova Move Toward Gas Generation Development

NextEra Energy is collaborating with GE Vernova on development of natural gas-fired power generation and is taking further steps toward restarting an idled nuclear plant. 

NextEra CEO John Ketchum announced the moves Jan. 24 with release of the company’s fourth-quarter and full-year financial results. Both are in response to the anticipated growth in U.S. power demand. 

The Duane Arnold Energy Center in Iowa was shut down after it suffered damage in an August 2020 derecho. After 45 years in operation, it was put in line for decommissioning rather than repairs. 

Nuclear fission has rapidly gained interest for its near-constant output of zero-emissions power, and NextEra has shown rapidly growing interest in restarting Duane Arnold. 

During the second-quarter earnings call in July 2024, Ketchum said the prospect of a restart under the right conditions had been given some thought. During the third-quarter call in October 2024, he said the company was “very interested” in a restart. 

During the fourth-quarter call, he said the company recently asked the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for a licensing change, an important first step on the regulatory path to restore Duane Arnold’s operating license and restart operations as early as the end of 2028. 

But a restart would meet only a fraction of the gigawatts of new generation the nation needs, and new-build nuclear is unlikely to fill that deficit in the next decade, he said. 

“That means we need renewables and storage to meet demand that is here today and, as we move towards the next decade, we can supplement renewables and storage with natural gas-fired generation,” Ketchum said. 

The framework agreement he announced with GE Vernova would create a partnership between a leading developer of power generation and a leading manufacturer of power generation equipment who already have a decadeslong relationship. 

“This agreement has the potential to support multiple gigawatts for data centers, the reshoring of manufacturing and the electrification of industry, as well as serve investor-owned utilities, municipalities, cooperatives and commercial and industrial customers,” Ketchum said. 

And it offers the potential to boost renewables development by pairing them with natural gas generation, he said. 

“Over the next four years, the companies plan to collaborate to identify key locations on the energy grid that would benefit from new generation,” Ketchum said. 

During the call, an analyst asked for the specifics of the partnership.  

Ketchum said NextEra and GE Vernova would target large load customers with an integrated solution of gas-fired generation, renewables and storage that would be co-owned equally by the partners and contracted on a long term to the customer. 

“We could contemplate in the right situation with the right customer potentially a build-own-transfer on gas-fired generation as well, if it was part of a larger transaction that included renewables and other growth opportunities,” he added. 

Another analyst asked about the costs involved in a Duane Arnold restart. 

Ketchum did not want to tip his hand prior to any cost negotiations, but said the storm damage is not severe or complicated — the cooling tower needs to be replaced, and NextEra has experience building cooling towers at its gas-fired plants. 

One of the first questions was about the “elephant in the room” — the Trump administration’s antipathy to renewables.  

Subsidiary NextEra Energy Resources is a leading developer of solar and wind power generation and energy storage. What impact does Ketchum expect from Trump’s executive orders targeting renewable energy and the IRA funding that has spurred growth in the renewable energy sector? 

Ketchum did not offer an exact answer. Instead, he offered reasons why that impact would not be great, and why he thought Trump would temper his initial stance. 

First off, he said, NextEra has only one onshore wind project on federal land and zero offshore wind, so it avoids the worst of the president’s wrath. 

Second, the country needs a lot more electricity quickly, and NextEra can deliver it quickly with wind, solar and storage. 

Finally, NextEra is one of the largest infrastructure developers in the nation; it plans to invest $120 billion over the next four years. 

“And again, 80% of those dollars is going into Republican states. That’s a lot of manufacturing, a lot of job creation, a lot of property taxes, a lot of economic benefits. So those are the messages that we’re trying to make sure we get we get across in Washington around the IRA discussion,” Ketchum said. 

“I remain very optimistic that we’re going to be able to work through any issues that that may come up along the way.” 

Preliminary full-year financials show NextEra Energy had 2024 net income of $6.94 billion on operating revenues of $24.75 billion, or $3.37 per share. 

That compares with $7.31 billion, $28.11 billion and $3.60 for all of 2023. 

NextEra Energy stock closed 5.2% higher in heavy trading Jan. 24, making it the highest-performing component in the S&P 500 on a day when the index closed 0.3% lower. 

Posted on

WRAP Members Align on Key Issues to Prioritize

Members of a key Western Resource Adequacy Program (WRAP) stakeholder group voted Jan. 23 to prioritize three topics of concern as the group continues developing the program aimed at addressing resource adequacy and reliability in the West. 

WRAP’s Program Review Committee (PRC) is “charged with receiving, considering and proposing design changes” to the RA program operated by the Western Power Pool (WPP). The PRC is developing a draft work plan to identify which changes it can develop into concrete proposals. 

During the meeting Jan. 23, the committee decided on three topics to prioritize for development this year, including load forecasting, adding language to clarify what qualifies as firm transmission under WRAP and enhancing the WRAP operations program to make it compatible with both SPP’s Markets+ and CAISO’s Extended Day-Ahead Market (EDAM). 

The prioritized topics have been on most members’ minds, and there appeared to be consensus on their importance, Rebecca Sexton, director of reliability programs at WPP, told RTO Insider. 

“There’s a lot still to do to come up with the final work plan,” Sexton said. “There’s a lot more opportunity for stakeholders to weigh in. But for now, seems like a lot of consensus on the order that they determined today.” 

Rebecca Sexton, director of reliability programs at WPP | © RTO Insider LLC

The PRC hopes to have the work plan endorsed by the WPP Board of Directors by June, but there will be a “rigorous process of review” between now and then, Sexton said. 

“So there’s a lot of opportunity for the … approach to change,” Sexton added. “But I think having not done this before and getting lots of very engaged input, this seems like we’re on a path to create something that people will endorse in a couple of months.” 

The PRC meeting followed WPP board’s approval of revisions to WRAP’s transition plan in September, including by postponing the program’s “binding” phase by one year and reducing penalties for participants who come up short on RA obligations. (See WPP Board Approves WRAP Transition Plan Changes.) 

The changes were made after WRAP participants urged the board to postpone the start of the program’s penalty phase by one year, from summer 2026 to summer 2027, citing “significant headwinds” in securing energy resources in light of supply chain issues, forecasts for faster-than-expected load growth and increasing extreme weather events.  

Though the revisions to the transition plan are part of a separate process from those discussed by the PRC, Sexton said much of the work within WRAP task forces tends to overlap. 

“It’s the way in which we’ll hopefully continue to be responsive to stakeholder needs, whether participant or non-participant, and evolve the program with best practices as resource adequacy practices change,” Sexton said. 

Posted on

PJM in Discussions with Gov. Shapiro on Capacity Price Cap

VALLEY FORGE, Pa. — PJM is in discussions with Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro to work toward a resolution on his complaint to FERC asking it to lower the price cap of the RTO’s capacity market, the Members Committee heard Jan. 23 (EL25-46). 

The discussions also follow a letter Shapiro wrote to the PJM Board of Members requesting that it intervene to avoid an “unacceptable” $20.4 billion increase in capacity market prices or the commonwealth may “re-evaluate” its relationship with the RTO. (See Shapiro Warns of ‘Reevaluation’ of PJM if Capacity Prices not Addressed.) 

PJM General Counsel Chris O’Hara told the committee that the discussions have included the design of a price cap, as well as the concept of a price floor. He said PJM also has emphasized to the governor that any market changes must consider the need to attract investment in the RTO while also balancing consumer rates. 

“We want to make sure you are all aware of these discussions,” he told stakeholders. 

Responding to questions on whether there is a timeline for PJM to reach a settlement or how the discussions interact with the schedule of the 2026/27 Base Residual Auction, O’Hara said the RTO is moving expeditiously. The auction is scheduled to be conducted in July and in several filings seeking to revise elements of the capacity market, PJM has requested orders by Feb. 21 to ensure it has time to implement the changes. 

“We are aware of the auction schedule, and we are moving with haste, but there is no date certain,” he said. 

Paul Sotkiewicz, president of E-Cubed Policy Associates, questioned if it was appropriate for PJM to be discussing market rules with a nonmember, particularly when the changes could affect all market participants. O’Hara responded that PJM will continue to have discussions with membership as well. 

Shapiro requested the auction’s price cap be reset to 1.5 times the net cost of new entry (CONE); the status quo is the greater of gross CONE or 1.75 times net CONE. On Jan. 21, FERC granted a joint motion that Shapiro and PJM filed asking for a one-week extension on the RTO’s deadline to respond. 

“The requested extension will allow the joint parties to engage in discussions concerning the complaint before any answers are filed,” they said in their motion. 

PJM responded to Shapiro’s letter on Jan. 16, saying it has yet to take a position on the substance of his complaint. 

“We share your concern for consumer cost increases resulting from the region’s supply/demand challenge,” PJM wrote. “We are simultaneously concerned about market changes that could serve to thwart new generation entry. This new entry is needed to preserve system reliability and ultimately reduce costs for consumers. PJM is very willing to have discussions about how these two concerns can simultaneously be addressed.” 

Since Shapiro’s complaint was filed, the governors of Maryland, Delaware, Illinois and New Jersey also have sent letters to PJM and FERC urging action. 

“As one of the original members of PJM, New Jersey has long worked in partnership with PJM to pioneer new and innovative approaches to provide our residents with reliable and affordable power, most recently exemplified with our work together on the State Agreement Approach,” Gov. Phil Murphy said in a Jan. 21 letter to the RTO. “That long partnership has become frayed in recent years as PJM continues to take actions that are incongruent with our energy policy and the best interests of our residents. I am calling on you to help repair that partnership and work with New Jersey and other interested states to resolve this matter.” 

In his own letter, Maryland Gov. Wes Moore argued that a lower price cap is needed to prevent a growing affordability problem from worsening in the next capacity auction. 

“I strongly urge you to make the requested adjustments to help contain costs to Maryland households, as well as households throughout PJM, particularly in light of the fact that the previous suite of changes to risk modeling and capacity accreditation developed under PJM’s Critical Issue Fast Path contributed to the results of the last auction,” he wrote. 

On Jan. 17, Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker and former Delaware Gov. Bethany Hall-Long (whose term ended Jan. 21) joined Murphy and Moore in a letter to FERC arguing that the temporary change would contain auction prices, as barriers to new entry prevent resources from responding to high prices and a large number of rule changes are being considered by the commission. 

“The proposed temporary modification to the price cap ensures that prices do not reach unjust and unreasonable levels despite the structural limitations in today’s marketplace preventing a pronounced market response to elevated prices,” they wrote. “This measure is also warranted given the unusually large number of emergency reforms PJM has proposed for the upcoming 2026/2027 auction, as well as the significant changes implemented in the 2025/2026 auction.”