February 4, 2025

765-kV Lines in West Texas Inch Closer to Reality

The drive to build 765-kV lines in Texas continues to inch forward, with ERCOT and stakeholders working to provide enough information for regulators to reach a decision on which framework to go with by May 1. 

During a workshop on extra-high-voltage (EHV) transmission Jan. 27, ERCOT staff shared with stakeholders their “traditional” 345-kV portfolio of projects as part of the grid operator’s annual Regional Transmission Plan (RTP). They also included for the first time a 765-kV study, a result of their 2024 Permian Basin Reliability Plan identifying transmission facilities and import paths needed to serve existing and future demand in petroleum-rich West Texas. 

The Texas Public Utility Commission in September approved the Permian Basin plan, which included both 345-kV and 765-kV infrastructure, and $13 billion to $15 billion in initial investment. However, it deferred a decision on the import paths’ voltage levels to no later than May 1, 2025. (See Texas PUC Approves Permian Reliability Plan.) 

The commission plans to open a comment period following a Jan. 31 discussion of the two plans. The PUC will host its own EHV workshop March 7 (55718). 

“My understanding from working with commission staff is that’s just the beginning of the process,” Prabhu Gnanam, ERCOT’s director of grid planning, told the workshop’s attendees. “All of this to help set up the commissioners to be able to make a decision before May 1.” 

Either plan will require thousands of miles of transmission lines to be built through 2030. Both will cost more than $30 billion, according to initial projections, far surpassing the last project of its kind in Texas, the Competitive Renewable Energy Zone (CREZ) initiative completed in 2014. That project resulted in 3,600 miles of transmission lines, built at a cost of $6.9 billion. CREZ has freed up more than 23 GW of wind capacity in West Texas that since has been added to the grid. 

texas lines

New 345-kV lines and upgrades as part of the 345-kV plan. | ERCOT

The Texas 765-kV Strategic Transmission Expansion Plan (STEP) has an estimated construction cost of $32.99 billion and includes: 

    • 2,468 miles of 765-kV lines. 
    • 649 miles of new 345-kV lines and 1,098 miles of existing 345-kV upgrades. 
    • 324 miles of new 138-kV lines and 1,287 miles of existing 138-kV upgrades. 
    • 446 miles of existing 69-to-138-kV conversions. 

The 2024 RTP 345-kV plan has a projected construction cost of $30.75 billion and includes: 

    • 2,673 miles of new 345-kV lines and 1,913 miles of existing 345-kV upgrades. 
    • 334 miles of new 138-kV lines and 1,714 miles of existing 138-kV upgrades. 
    • 647 miles of existing 69-kV to 138-kV conversions. 

Both plans will require an estimated $5 billion annually over the six-year planning horizon, as compared to an average of $3 billion per year over 2022/24, the grid operator said. 

ERCOT says its analysis indicates the 765-kV STEP would provide “significant economic and reliability benefits” to the system because 765-kV lines are more efficient in moving power from resource-rich regional to load centers over long distances. 

The grid operator said last year it expects over 150 GW of demand, more than its current capacity, to be added to the system by 2030. Almost 50 GW of that expected demand is from the oil and gas natural load, AI and data centers, cryptocurrency mining, electrification, and hydrogen processing and related infrastructure. 

“If those large loads move from one county to the next, you’re still making that power flow across the state,” Kristi Hobbs, ERCOT’s vice president of system planning and weatherization, told the workshop’s attendees. “Then you can deal with any changes to the large loads through the subsequent underlying 345-kV network that will support it.” 

Staff conducted steady-state transfer capability, dynamic stability and system strength analyses to gain a clearer picture of how either option could support reliability and grid stability. Staff said the higher-voltage option would reduce congestion costs by $229 million annually and cut system production costs by $28 million, both annually. (ERCOT has incurred $4.27 billion in congestion costs the past two years.) 

The 765-kV STEP would reduce energy losses by 560 GWh each year, equivalent to a 128-MW thermal unit operating at a 50% capacity factor, staff said in its report. It also would yield an increase of up to 3,000 MW in power transfer capability and a 13% stability limit in West Texas. 

ERCOT used $6.2 million/mile and $4.2 million/mile as “generic cost estimates” for the 765-kV and 345-kV facilities. The 765-kV cost estimate is based on the same dollar figure used in MISO’s Long-range Transmission Plan, approved in December and including 1,800 miles of new 765-kV projects. The 345-kV number is based on the average cost for new 345-kV lines provided by transmission service providers in the Permian Basin study. 

“As we look at the additional transfer capability of the higher-voltage network, which also would be setting us up for future growth as well and giving us some breathing room … the TSPs and stakeholders that try to take outages on the system today can tell you that we have maximized or optimized the use of our current system,” Hobbs said. 

BPA Considers Impact of Fees in Day-ahead Market Choice

PORTLAND, Ore. — The Bonneville Power Administration could face high implementation fees and operating costs under both SPP’s Markets+ and CAISO’s EDAM, but exact amounts are in flux, and various factors could soften the financial blow, staff members said during BPA’s member meeting Jan. 29.

Rachel Dibble, vice president of bulk power marketing at BPA, told RTO Insider that implementation fees are “one part of the puzzle” in the agency’s final market decision. The agency will weigh those considerations against results of production cost models, “as well as all the other quantitative elements that weren’t included in the production cost model,” Dibble added.

“As far as the magnitude of those numbers, they probably sit more in the ongoing revenue … and costs that we would generate from participating in the market,” Dibble said. “I would expect over time, we would make back all of the money that we would be investing in getting ready to enter a market. So, we will certainly consider them, and they will be part of the decision.”

SPP estimates Phase 2 implementation costs across the entire Markets+ footprint will be about $150 million, and it is unclear exactly how much of that BPA would be responsible for. Agency staff have noted it’s probably about $25 million, which is more than the $2.5 million to $3 million in implementation fees expected under an EDAM scenario.

However, CAISO also has projected $29 million annually in grid management charge fees for the BPA BAA across all scheduling coordinators. The charge is a transactional fee applied to each transaction, and the agency itself would “bear only a share of these charges based on its activities representing its loads and resources in the market,” according to a staff presentation.

Andy Meyers, market initiatives policy lead with BPA, noted the agency itself would pay less than $29 million under EDAM, adding that “knowing exactly what Bonneville’s portion of that is an … outstanding question, but knowing kind of where the maximum is for the BAA is helpful in providing a reference point.”

By contrast, the $150 million Phase 2 costs associated with Markets+ would be financed, and BPA would repay its portion of the loan with a market transaction fee applied to each transaction made in the market. The $150 million covers staff, facilities, infrastructure, tools and applications.

BPA would pay its share of the Phase 2 funding fees on top of annual operating costs, which are projected to be between $13 million and $15 million, according to the staff’s presentation.

Still, Laura Trolese with The Energy Authority noted that BPA would pay Phase 2 funding fees on market transactions over several years, which potentially could limit the financial impact.

Spencer Gray, executive director of the Northwest & Intermountain Power Producers Coalition, asked whether BPA still would be on the hook for its share of the Phase 2 portion if the agency decides to leave Markets+ after signing a Phase 2 agreement.

BPA Chief Business Transformation Officer Nita Zimmerman responded that it “gets into the specifics of the funding agreement. That’s up to SPP to share and not me. It really depends on how far the funding agreements go as to how much we would be on the hook for and at what point.”

Likewise, BPA could not provide a definite answer to what extent the fee agreements factor in “inflationary assumptions,” following a question by Stefanie Johnson, strategic adviser at Seattle City Light.

There are still details, like specific amounts, timing and mechanics, that BPA needs to iron out before it can give stakeholders a clearer picture of how implementation fees would impact the agency under either Markets+ or EDAM. The agency also is working on estimates for internal implementation costs, staff said.

BPA has said it will issue a draft day-ahead market decision in March and a final decision in May.

New England Gas Generation Hit a Record High in 2024

As overall power production ticked up in New England in 2024, natural gas generation reached its highest annual total in the region’s history, accounting for over 55% of all generation and 51% of net energy for load, according to new data from ISO-NE. 

Natural gas generation provided 59,883 GWh of power in 2024, up from 55,585 in 2023, which resulted in an increase in annual power sector emissions. Oil generation remained steady year-over-year, while coal generation accounted for 234 GWh, a small increase relative to 2023. 

One of the largest year-over-year changes came from a major reduction in power imported from Canada, as a massive drought caused Hydro-Québec to reduce its exports. Net imports from Canada declined for the second straight year, dropping to 6,067 GWh, less than half of the 2023 levels. 

For renewables, solar and wind generation both increased in 2024 compared to 2023, but they remain a relatively small part of the region’s resource mix. Solar increased from 3,852 GWh in 2023 to 4,554 GWh, while wind increased from 3,302 GWh to 3,517 GWh. This does not include power from behind-the-meter solar, which reduced net load by about 4,300 GWh in 2023. 

New England annual solar and wind generation (GWh) | © RTO Insider LLC

While solar has grown steadily over the past 10 years, wind power production has been largely stagnant since 2017. Despite the year-over-year increase, wind was lower in 2024 compared to 2019-2022. This could change rapidly if Vineyard Wind 1 and Revolution Wind ramp up power production in 2025 and 2026. 

Nuclear generation rebounded in 2024 after a significant down year in 2023. It has remained relatively consistent around 26,000 GWh of annual generation after the closure of the Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station in 2019. 

The decrease in imports, coupled with the spike in gas generation, contributed to the highest annual generation total in the region since 2013. The peak load in 2024 was 24,871 MW, up 828 MW from 2023 but in line with the region’s average annual peak over the past 10 years. 

Both the peak load and total annual generation remain well below the highs reached in the mid-2000s. The region hit its all-time peak in 2006 at 28,130 MW, while total generation peaked at 131,877 GWh in 2005. 

In the coming years, ISO-NE’s peak load and overall generation requirements are projected to increase exponentially with heating and transportation electrification. The RTO projects the peak load to increase by about 10% by 2033, coupled with a 17% increase in electricity consumption. (See ISO-NE Predicts 10% Increase in Peak Demand by 2033.) 

These increases likely will accelerate in the years prior to 2050. ISO-NE projected in its Economic Planning for the Clean Energy Transition study that the region’s peak load will reach 60.8 GW by 2050. Massachusetts’ 2050 Decarbonization Study projected a more modest 57 GW. 

New England annual net imports (GWh) | © RTO Insider LLC

As demand increases, the states will need to find a way to reverse the increase in gas generation to meet their climate goals for 2030 and beyond. ISO-NE has expressed interest in establishing new market mechanisms to support low-carbon resources and dispatchable resources, but the states have been slow to pursue these options. 

Beyond emissions concerns, there are physical constraints to how much more gas generation the region could add to meet rising demand, particularly during the winter. Gas utilities reserve much of the pipeline capacity into the region in the winter to meet heating needs, limiting gas generation during these periods. 

In 2023, Enbridge proposed a significant pipeline expansion project, intended to help ease some of the region’s gas constraints. The company marketed the project to meet growing demand from generation and local distribution companies. (See Enbridge Announces Project to Increase Northeast Pipeline Capacity.) 

It has not filed the project with FERC, and it told a municipal utility in May that it is “looking to get signatures on the precedent agreements, and at that point, we will file with [FERC].” 

However, Enbridge and the gas utilities could face a challenging regulatory environment to approve contracts for the project in Massachusetts, where regulators are pushing the utilities to transition away from natural gas in accordance with the state’s decarbonization requirements. 

MISO Unveils Later Timeline for Queue Processing Restart

MISO is pushing back a restart of its swamped generator interconnection queue by a few months while it tries to study through the backlog with tech company Pearl Street.

The RTO now plans to finish the first phase of studies on the 2022 batch of project proposals before it begins studying the 2023 class in May. It won’t begin analyzing 2025 entrants until the fourth quarter. However, MISO hopes to have all projects striking interconnection agreements over 2026, with the 2022 cycle proceeding in the second quarter, 2023 in the third quarter and 2025 by the end of 2026.

Last year, MISO tentatively scheduled the 2025 cycle of queue projects to begin in the third quarter. It also said it would begin studying the 123 GW of 2023 interconnection requests in February. (See 2023 Queue Cycle Delayed into 2025 as MISO Seeks Software Help on Studies.)

MISO skipped acceptance of a 2024 queue class altogether. The RTO hasn’t processed a new queue cycle in more than a year, saying it needs to introduce study automation and implement a megawatt cap to make processing requests less daunting. (See MISO to Skip 2024 Queue Cycle While it Automates Study Process with Tech Startup.)

It is betting that Pittsburgh-based tech startup Pearl Street’s SUGAR (Suite of Unified Grid Analyses with Renewables) can get its overtaxed queue down to a one-year process.

Pearl Street and MISO are automating several aspects of the queue, including the studies that select network upgrades and estimate costs, study reports, and the process behind power flow model building, dispatching and solving.

In a teleconference Jan. 28, MISO’s Ryan Westphal told the Interconnection Process Working Group that the RTO is “testing and getting things tuned in” on the automated work.

Westphal said that while MISO and Pearl Street have made “significant progress” on implementing SUGAR, they “need a little more time” to refine the process and make it more user friendly as stakeholders have requested.

He said that by Feb. 10, MISO will begin using Pearl Street in earnest on the proposals that entered the queue in 2022. It hopes to finish the first phase of interconnection studies for the 2022 cycle by early May.

Westphal said MISO is choosing to complete the 2022 cycle’s first phase studies before it starts on 2023’s class to limit ambiguity in study results. He said a prior cycle’s resources become assumptions in future study cycles, so MISO should avoid study overlap. The sheer size of the 2022 and 2023 queue cycles — 171 GW and 123 GW, respectively — also makes some separation a wise call.

“The 2022 cycle is large, as everyone remembers, so it’s really prudent to get it through the queue,” Westphal said.

Westphal said at this point, MISO plans to kick off the 2022 cycle on Feb. 10 and the 2023 cycle on May 5. The RTO hopes the technology can help it shrink the first phase of studies to 90 days.

It further estimates that SUGAR will reduce time spent on the 2022 and 2023 cycles by anywhere from 270 to 365 days, a “massive engineering time savings.”

“We have to move through the backlog to get through to the place we want to be,” Westphal said. He predicted “a lot of work” and MISO continuing to process simultaneous cycles until it can cut its queue down to a one-year interconnection process.

“We think that SUGAR gives us the best chance to do that,” Westphal said. “We’re hoping this is a big piece of us being able to achieve a one-year queue process.”

The RTO also hopes that SUGAR can speed up the first phase of interconnection studies in particular so its engineers can devote more attention to the more intricate, back-end studies of the queue, Westphal said.

Global 2024 Energy Transition Investments Estimated at over $2T

Worldwide investments in the energy transition totaled $2.1 trillion in 2024, BloombergNEF reports.

While it is the first time BNEF calculated the investments at greater than $2 trillion in its annual report, the 11% year-over-year growth was less than in the preceding three years, which saw annual increases of 24% to 29%.

China dominated the global tally with $818 billion. The United States was a distant second at $338 billion, and the other eight nations in the Top 10 list of economies ranged from $109 billion (Germany) to $29 billion (Japan). The 27 EU nations totaled $381 billion, and all other nations combined for $333 billion.

The bulk of the spending was in three sectors: electrified transport ($757 billion), renewable energy ($728 billion) and power grids ($390 billion).

Investment in the remaining sectors (carbon capture and storage, clean industry, clean shipping, electrified heat, hydrogen, nuclear) accounted for just 7.4% of total investments and collectively was 23% lower than in 2023.

This demonstrates the challenge of scaling up “emerging” clean technologies, the authors wrote. The exception was energy storage, which jumped 36% to a record $54 billion investment despite the headwinds facing it.

energy

China dominated global investment in the clean energy transition in 2024. | BloombergNEF

BNEF also notes the record level of investment still is far short of what is needed to reach net zero by 2050.

Albert Cheung, deputy CEO of BNEF and lead author of “Energy Transition Investment Trends 2025,” said in a Jan. 30 news release:

“Our report shows just how much growth we’ve seen in the energy transition over the past few years, despite political uncertainty and high interest rates. There is still much more that needs to be done, especially in emerging areas like industrial decarbonization, hydrogen and carbon capture, in order to reach global net-zero goals. True partnership between the private and public sectors is the only solution to unlock the potential of these technologies.”

Along with energy transition investment, the report examines three other types of funding: clean energy supply chain investment, climate-tech equity finance and energy transition debt issuance.

    • Supply chain investment — new factories commissioned in 2024, mines and battery metal processing facilities — totaled $140 billion, down from $145 billion in 2023. Despite efforts to move supply chains away from mainland China, it still accounted for 81% of the total.
    • Climate-tech companies raised $51 billion in private and public equity in 2024, a 40% drop from 2023 that BNEF attributes in part to artificial intelligence startups competing for funding. Clean power and transport companies accounted for the majority of equity, $32 billion.
    • Debt issuance rose 3% to $1 trillion in 2024. The United States ($206 billion) and China ($169 billion) were the largest markets by a wide margin and were 5% and 13% higher respectively than in 2023. European issuances dropped 7% year over year while volume in the Middle East/Africa was down 35%.

NYPA Finalizes Road Map for Renewables Development

The New York Power Authority has finalized a plan to begin executing in its expanded role as a renewable energy developer. 

NYPA said it is pursuing 37 solar and storage projects totaling 3 GW of nameplate capacity, most of them in partnership with private-sector developers. 

The final plan is noticeably smaller than the draft plan offered in October 2024, which envisioned 40 proposals rated at 3.5 GW. NYPA officials had cautioned at the time that there would be substantial attrition among that initial list of proposals, as there would be with any list of early-stage renewable energy projects. 

Public power advocates have been hoping for a 15-GW road map and have been sorely disappointed with NYPA’s much lower ambition for its first tranche. With release of the final plan, they renewed their call for the ouster of CEO Justin Driscoll. 

During a budget hearing Jan. 28, Driscoll faced some pointed questioning by legislators who also had hoped for more from NYPA, which until recently had limited itself to small solar and battery projects, often in cooperation with other entities. 

In 2023, they and like-minded legislators gave the U.S.’ largest state-owned power entity expanded development powers as private-sector efforts to decarbonize New York’s power grid were proving to be slow and expensive. 

The idea was that without a profit motive, NYPA could accomplish the task at lower cost to New Yorkers, who already pay some of the highest electricity rates in the U.S. and are looking at significant increases as aging power infrastructure is expanded or replaced. 

The move would also democratize energy, they hoped, giving the public a greater voice in how its state is powered. 

The initial interaction of this vision, the Build Public Renewables Act, never made it into law; the version that subsequently was enacted is less ambitious or more achievable, depending on one’s perspective. 

Driscoll did not bend under questioning, telling legislators that NYPA is proud of its freshman effort. Three gigawatts is only the first tranche, he said. 

“We’re going to be amending the plan that we just approved today to add additional projects within the next six months. … This is a long journey toward achieving these goals, but we think we’re playing a significant role, along with others.” 

Driscoll noted that the three projects that dropped out of the draft plan are not dead; they are just moving forward separately from NYPA. 

State Sen. Kevin Parker (D), chair of the Energy and Telecommunications Committee, asked Driscoll what NYPA needed from the legislature to help it move forward. 

The requirement that NYPA own at least 51% of joint projects has caused some setbacks, Driscoll responded. 

“We’re finding that some developers don’t want to have a minority interest with us,” he said. 

The coalition Public Power NY ripped into this idea.  

“Justin Driscoll’s suggestion to strip the public ownership requirement out of the Build Public Renewables Act shows he is unfit to serve as NYPA CEO and not accountable to New Yorkers, legislators and labor demanding NYPA build 15 GW of renewables, but instead serves the interest of private energy developers,” it said in a press release. 

Other legislators wanted to know about progress toward another mandate placed on NYPA in the same 2023 law: retirement of its 11 small natural gas power plants by 2030, if grid resource adequacy allows. 

NYPA is making progress and on schedule to meet the May 2025 deadline to report its plans, Driscoll said. It has reached the framework for a potential agreement with developers who want to convert two of the peakers into battery facilities and is in similar negotiations on three others. 

NYPA generates up to a quarter of the state’s electricity, mainly through huge hydropower projects that harness the outflow of two of the Great Lakes; it operates a third of the state’s high-voltage transmission; its pumped hydro facility is by far the largest energy storage system in New York; and it is 94 years old. 

A PPNY activist and an NYPA executive who spoke separately to NetZero Insider after release of the draft plan in October laid out a classic chicken-and-egg impasse: 

PPNY: NYPA could use its strong bond rating to boost the energy transition at a lower cost.  

NYPA: Our bond rating is strong because we operate judiciously. 

PPNY: NYPA should concentrate less on preserving its bond rating and more on preserving the planet. 

NYPA: Our ability to develop planet-saving renewables depends on our strong bond rating. 

This week’s events suggest the two sides will have to agree to disagree a while longer. 

Overheard at USEA State of the Energy Industry Forum 2025

WASHINGTON ― The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners will hold roundtables on demand growth at each of its major conferences this year, Executive Director Tony Clark said at the United States Energy Association’s State of the Energy Industry Forum on Jan. 23.

The former FERC commissioner and North Dakota regulator was asked how NARUC is addressing the challenges of data centers and demand growth. NARUC is very good at convening and educating, he answered, which is exactly what it will do on the topic beginning with the Winter Policy Summit in Washington, D.C.

Each roundtable will have “21 people, who at each of the meetings [are] going to have a deep dialogue on just these issues. … Seven state commissioners, seven folks from the utility industry and seven folks from the demand side of the equation ― hyperscalers, data centers, things like that ― [will be] encouraging this kind of dialogue so we can get to, hopefully, some of the answers.”

Todd Snitchler, CEO of the Electric Power Supply Association, pointed to the combination of different state clean energy goals and demand growth as driving market transformation.

Varying state climate goals have “challenged market operators in a way that is not something they were originally constructed to do,” Snitchler said. “So, we’re going through some growing pains in order to sort out how we deliver” reliable, affordable and increasingly clean power, he said.

The restarting of decommissioned nuclear plants ― Palisades in Michigan and Three Mile Island in Pennsylvania ― possibly to power co-located data centers “suggests that restructured markets are finding ways to deliver,” he said. “They are working to define innovative approaches in order to supply power in a way that is cost effective, and they can deploy perhaps new mechanisms in order to achieve those outcomes. That’s going to require a bit of a different approach and different thinking.”

With estimates of coming demand growth still rising, what’s needed are “rules of the road that make it clear about who pays how much [and] what is required for approvals. That will accelerate the process; that will help everyone navigate the situation in a fashion that I think is better and helps achieve the policy goals that the country has,” he said.

Clark called for federal-state cooperation to get more generation and transmission online, arguing that federal roadblocks on permitting are often the primary cause of delays, rather than state processes.

But he cautioned that simply federalizing permitting may not solve the issues. “It will actually promote longer lead times if you don’t reform the underlying problems that the federal government is having. … The federal government and states fighting over some issue rarely turns out well.”

Leveraging state resources and regulatory models must be part of the process. Clark is optimistic about working with new FERC Chair Mark Christie, also a former state regulator, who “has shown a willingness to really listen to the concerns of the states,” he said. (See President Trump Names Mark Christie as FERC Chair.)

When Nuclear?

Data centers’ voracious appetite for power is creating new momentum for nuclear energy, but questions remain about when new plants, including small modular reactors, will come online.

Maria Korsnick, CEO of the Nuclear Energy Institute, pointed to a growing industry pipeline of permitting applications at the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, including 23 for plant upgrades or license extensions.

“Just in the next few years, we expect nine site permit applications,” she said. “We expect five construction permits. We have two construction and operating permits,” along with the restarts of Palisades and Three Mile Island.

But to get new plants online, tax credits and other federal incentives for nuclear will be imperative, she said; for example, the Department of Energy’s Advanced Reactor Demonstration Program, which is providing $2.5 billion to support early deployments of SMRs.

Federal support will be critical for “early mover support” to building out critical supply chains pipelines for advanced nuclear, she said.

Arshad Mansoor, CEO of the Electric Power Research Institute, said the goal should be for nuclear to become “a catalog technology … that you can go to a catalog and buy. Gen III, Gen IV, small modular reactors … these are not catalog technologies, yet we need to deploy at least 10 of them before they become a catalog technology.”

With ongoing support from Congress and the National Laboratories, Mansoor said, next generation nuclear could go catalog in five or six years.

Andrew Holland, CEO of the Fusion Industry Association, said his members now estimate nuclear fusion plants will be putting electricity on the grid in the 2030s, “with about 85% saying in the first half” of the next decade.

Fusion ― which could produce massive amounts of power by combining, rather than splitting, atoms ― “is now moving from the place where it has that long, long horizon, to something that is indeed on the horizon and coming closer, and the reason is because we’re moving from the National Labs and the universities into the marketplace,” Holland said.

Started four years ago, the FIA has 40 members working to commercialize fusion and 100 affiliate members, representing “the whole big tent of … both supply chain and end users for fusion power,” he said. Another key sign of growth, the industry has raised more than $8 billion in private investment.

In 2023, Microsoft signed a power purchase agreement with fusion startup Helion, with a delivery date of 2028. Holland said fusion could be a comprehensive solution to a range of energy industry challenges “when we get it.” It will be always available and abundant, and he argued the U.S. has to get serious about winning the global race for it.

“Fusion should be treated just like every other emerging energy source has been treated,” he said. “That means public-private partnerships should be funded at significant levels,” similar to the ARDP.

Wildfires a ‘Societal Problem’

The closest reference to climate change came in a taped message from Pat Vincent-Collawn, interim CEO of the Edison Electric Institute. With wildfires still burning in Southern California, Vincent-Collawn acknowledged that fire threats have become “a year-round problem,” but they are “a societal problem that requires societal solutions.”

A major policy priority for EEI is the development of a comprehensive national strategy that focuses on adaptation, including “community protection, wildfire prevention, responsible investment and rapid recovery,” she said.

The Electricity You Don’t Use

Paula Glover, president of the Alliance to Save Energy, kicked off the final panel of the day by noting that no one thus far had talked about energy efficiency, which she argued should be “foundational” in discussions about demand growth.

“It almost sounds as if we assume there is nothing we can do,” and that demand will just continue to rise, Glover said. “But what really makes an impact on customers, whether they are business customers, large and small, or residential consumers, is the ability of people to use energy for whatever they need, but not as much.”

Whatever generation technology is used, efficiency should be a “first field, [so] that thing that you don’t use has far more value.”

One priority for ASE going forward is working with RTOs, such as MISO and PJM, on their implementation of FERC Order 2222, specifically as it applies to the integration of virtual power plants on the grid and measuring the value of the efficiency they can provide, Glover said.

She also believes that even as AI becomes pervasive, it will become more efficient. “So, when we’re thinking about increased generation [and] demand because of AI, we also know that 20 years from now, what AI uses today is probably going to go down because of that technology.

“And so, the argument is always, if you think about what industry can do when you’re planning, then you’re not building as much; you’re not buying as much; people aren’t using as much,” she said. “And we know it’s just going to get better, better, better as time goes on.”

FERC Upholds $150K Penalty for Facility Misratings

A $150,000 penalty leveled by SERC Reliability and multiple other regional entities for violations of NERC’s reliability standards at several wind and solar power facilities operated by Duke Energy will stand, after FERC confirmed in a Jan. 29 filing that it would not further review a settlement between the REs and Duke (NP25-4). 

NERC filed the settlement with the commission Dec. 30, 2024, in a spreadsheet notice of penalty. The ERO also filed a separate spreadsheet NOP for violations of the Critical Infrastructure Protection standards, but information on these infringements was not disclosed for security reasons. The commission also approved the CIP violation settlements. 

Commissioner Judy Chang did not participate in FERC’s decision, according to the commission’s filing. 

The spreadsheet NOP did not identify the other REs involved in the settlement besides SERC. However, it did list the facilities where violations were found. These facilities were located in Texas, Oklahoma, North Carolina, Wyoming, California, Iowa and Kansas, suggesting that the Texas Reliability Entity, Midwest Reliability Organization and WECC could be parties to the settlement as well. SERC said in the filing that the facilities were part of an existing coordinated oversight agreement. 

All of the facilities involved were built by Duke Energy Renewables and operated by the utility until 2023, when DER was acquired by Brookfield Asset Management and rebranded Deriva Energy. Duke Energy Renewables Services continued to operate the facilities. 

According to the spreadsheet NOP, Duke informed SERC in 2023 that the solar and wind facilities were not compliant with FAC-008-5 (Facility ratings). Requirement R6 of the standard mandates that transmission owners and GOs must “have evidence to show that [their] facility ratings are consistent with the documentation for determining” those ratings.  

A total of 12 of the documented facilities had lacked accurate facility ratings since their registrations first became effective, SERC said, ranging from July 2009 to April 2023. In eight cases, the documented rating was higher than the rating of the facility’s most limiting element; the magnitude of the difference ranged from 1.23 MVA to 17.35 MVA. The other four had ratings lower than the most limiting element. 

Three more facilities had accurate ratings at the time their registrations became effective, but the facilities were rerated in February 2023 after a vendor miscalculated the capacity of the wind turbines at each site. As a consequence, the utility established new ratings that were lower than the previous ratings. These errors were corrected by June 2023. 

In addition, DERS had all of its entities perform an extent of condition review, which identified inaccurate equipment ratings at seven more solar and wind facilities. These locations “documented accurate overall facility ratings but had included several inaccurate equipment ratings for individual elements in the workpapers supporting the facility ratings,” SERC said. 

The RE determined that because of the length the inaccuracies persisted, FAC-008-5’s predecessors FAC-009-1 and FAC-008-3 were infringed as well. It attributed the root cause of the violations to a “programmatic failure resulting from deficient fleet-wide internal controls,” noting that DERS did not perform a secondary review to identify errors in the initial facility rating calculations and that “numerous errors in the initial … evaluation still occurred” despite the utility’s practice of capturing element ratings through nameplate photos. 

SERC assessed the risk posed by the infringement as “elevated” because of the widespread nature of the issues, caused by the programmatic failure. The RE observed that running in excess of the facility rating, as occurred at three facilities, could lead to damaged equipment and outages, although this did not happen in practice. Also, SERC said the incorrect ratings could lead to system instability “because planning models and system operating limits would not accurately reflect the true limits of the facility.” 

SERC and the other regions did not award mitigating credit for self-reporting because DERS submitted the reports after it was notified of an upcoming compliance audit. 

Deriva took several actions to mitigate the noncompliance in addition to updating the element and facility ratings. These include updating the NERC implementation checklist to require a walkdown to verify ratings before registration, developing a new procedure for creating and updating the facility ratings spreadsheet, training relevant staff on documentation updates and completing on-site walkdowns of all appropriate facilities to verify ratings. 

ACEEE Report Highlights Success of ‘Next Generation’ Efficiency Policies

The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy released a report Jan. 29 highlighting the success of states that have adopted “energy efficiency resource standards” (EERS), which require utilities to achieve multiyear energy savings targets.

Twenty-six states and D.C. have adopted such standards. They make up about 59% of the U.S. population but 82% of the savings from utility energy efficiency programs, according to the report, “Next Generation Energy Efficiency Resource Standards Update.” EERS policies set long-term or multiyear targets for electric or natural gas savings, make the targets mandatory and include funding to meet the goals.

“On average, in 2023, utilities achieved 99% of their EERS goals, with some utilities exceeding goals and others falling a little short,” the report says. “Utilities exceeding goals were often aided by performance incentives that reward utilities for exceeding EERS minimums.”

If just savings targets are set, the tendency will be to implement low-cost programs that achieve targets for the lowest price. But other objectives, such as emissions targets or low-income requirements, can help make the programs more beneficial.

The study examined four next generation elements for EERS policies: mandatory emissions-reduction targets; electrification; minimum targets for underserved customers such as low-income households; and energy burden maximums or affordability provisions. A few states have other options, like Texas’ peak demand savings, but because they are infrequent, the study does not go into depth on them.

Instead, the study examines the programs in Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota and New York, for which those next generation elements are increasing low-income and electrification activity.

“Next generation policies are also contributing to complementary policies such as new construction requirements in Massachusetts and New York, electric rate redesign efforts in Massachusetts and low-income rates in Illinois and Minnesota,” the report says. “More impacts are likely to become apparent in the next few years after new programs and policies triggered by recent legislation and commission orders take effect.”

The paper recommends that the 24 states that do not have EERS policies adopt them either through new legislation or by an order from the utility commissions. Four states — Arizona, Arkansas, North Carolina and Wisconsin — have EERS policies with no “next generation policies,” and the paper suggests adding emissions targets, electrification goals or low-income provisions.

But even the states that have EERS programs with next generation provisions, including D.C., could add ones that they lack or expand existing programs.

“States with next generation components should regularly review and refine those components, such as New York did with its 2022-2023 interim review; Massachusetts is doing with its new three-year plan covering 2025-2027; and Minnesota and Illinois have been doing with new legislation,” the report says. “These reviews should be publicized so other states can learn from them.”

Low-income requirements are the most common next generation policy, and also the only one adopted in enough states to permit analysis of their effect.

“Many EERS states encourage or require explicit programs to serve low-income customers, as these customers often live in inefficient homes and apartments but can least afford high energy bills,” the report says. “Of the 26 states plus D.C., 21 have the next generation feature of specific targets for serving low-income customers.”

Across all states, low-income program spending averaged $14, but in EERS states, the customer class got an average of $26.

“Going forward, states should consider requiring utilities to account for multiple factors when setting a spending target for low-income customers,” the report says. “Some examples include socioeconomic characteristics of their service territories, percentage of income-qualified customers to total participants and the total amount of the utility’s portfolio investments.”

Carbon policies increasingly have been added to efficiency standards in recent years, but only 16 of the 26 EERS states have explicit decarbonization targets.

NEPOOL TC Votes Against Compliance Proposal for Interconnection Order

The NEPOOL Transmission Committee has declined to support a compliance proposal from the New England transmission owners for a recent FERC order preventing the TOs from charging interconnection customers for operations and maintenance fees associated with network upgrades.  

In December, FERC sided with clean energy advocacy group RENEW Northeast in a dispute over who must pay for the upkeep and operation of interconnection network upgrades. The commission determined these costs should not be paid by the interconnection customer, shifting them over to transmission rates. (See FERC Sides with New England Developers on Interconnection Complaint.) 

In response to the order, the TOs propose to amend the RTO’s tariff to remove operations and maintenance costs from network upgrade requirements.  

However, RENEW argues the TOs’ proposal does not “remove all the annual costs associated with network upgrades, stand-alone network upgrades and distribution upgrades as required by the order.” 

RENEW wrote that the TOs’ proposal fails to address “some remaining annual costs … such as cost of capital, federal and state income taxes, and other related costs,” which still could be assigned to interconnection customers, it wrote in a memo published prior to the Jan. 29 TC meeting. 

The group also argued that provisions of the TOs’ proposal that assign “repair and replacement” costs to interconnection customers are “directly contrary to the requirements” of the Dec. 19 order. 

Finally, RENEW opposed the proposal to continue billing operations and maintenance costs until the TOs recalculate their billing formulas, and to issue refunds for these charges by mid-June. The group argued that continuing these charges is prohibited by the order.  

The TOs’ proposal failed to pass with just 33.3% support from the committee, backed by members of the transmission and publicly owned entity sectors. Members of the generation, alternative resources, supplier and end user sectors opposed the proposal. It now will head to the Participants Committee in February for a vote, without the backing of the TC.  

Also at the Jan. 29 meeting, the TC voted to support a Transmission Operating Agreement for the New England Clean Energy Connect transmission line and discussed compliance with FERC Order 904. 

Order 904, released in November 2024, prohibits transmission providers from including charges in transmission rates to compensate generators for reactive power which falls “within the standard power factor range by generating facilities.” 

The committee also discussed improvements to the ISO-NE’s economic study process. ISO-NE economic studies are intended to evaluate and address potential market inefficiencies or transmission congestion or integrate new resources or load.  

The RTO is in the second phase of a project to improve these studies, which is focused on making changes to identify “system efficiency issues and needs by establishing a clear trigger for when to issue a request for proposals, defining benefit metrics for evaluating RFP responses and streamlining the RFP process into a single stage.” 

Patrick Boughan of ISO-NE noted that the RTO plans “an interregional model that explicitly models the projected future demand and resources of surrounding regions,” instead of relying on historical data, as it has done in the past. The RTO also plans to transition from modeling imports as zero-cost resources to estimating their cost based on the interregional model. 

Boughan also said ISO-NE “does not propose to pursue consideration of capacity savings” in the Phase 2 project, noting the RTO simultaneously is developing a major overhaul of its capacity market and has “no reliable method to estimate capacity savings” over the 10-year planning horizon.  

He also noted the RTO plans to mirror how its longer-term transmission planning process treats aging transmission equipment. 

“If a proposal includes rebuilding or eliminating a transmission element that is on the Asset Condition List, or an element that is more than 40 years old, the avoided cost of that upgrade will be counted as an avoided transmission investment,” Boughan said.