What happens when the owner of a federally licensed hydroelectric project fails to build the fish passage facilities required by its license? In the recent case of the East Juliette Hydroelectric Project in Georgia, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission revoked the project's license, ending the owner's right to operate its generating equipment.
The East Juliette Hydroelectric Project is (or was) based around the East Juliette Dam on the Ocmulgee River, a tributary to the Altamaha River. Built in 1921, the dam is hundreds of miles inland from tidewater -- but nevertheless represents the first passage barrier that anadromous fish, including American shad, encounter on their migrations upstream from the Atlantic Ocean to the Ocmulgee River. State and federal fisheries agencies have identified restoring access to historical spawning habitat for American shad as one of their highest priorities for the region.
Since 1995, the East Juliette Hydroelectric Project has been owned by Eastern Hydroelectric Corporation. The project facilities include a 20-foot-high, 1,230-foot-long concrete gravity dam that creates a 78-acre reservoir with a storage capacity of 418 acre-feet, and two powerhouses with a total installed capacity of 687 kW.
In 2002, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission amended the project's license to authorize the construction of a new powerhouse and 1,200 kW generating unit. As part of that amendment, the FERC added language to the project's license requiring the licensee to install new fish passage facilities at the East Juliette Dam. Similar conditions were imposed by the Georgia Department of Natural Resources as part of its water quality certification for the amendment.
According to the recent FERC order, while the licensee proposed a plan to construct fish lift at the dam, it ultimately did not follow through with its plan. At several points over the past 5 years, FERC staff licensee directed the licensee to comply or else face civil penalties, an order to cease operation of the project, or revocation of the license pursuant to section 31 of the Federal Power Act.
Under section 31(b) of the Federal Power Act, after notice and an opportunity for an evidentiary hearing, the FERC may issue an order revoking a license, where the licensee is found have knowingly violated a final order after having been given reasonable time to comply fully with that order. In Eastern Hydro's case, FERC found that despite 12 years of intensive efforts by its own staff and other agencies, "these efforts have met with steady resistance from the licensee."
Ultimately, the FERC found that Eastern Hydro knowingly violated its compliance order and that it was given a reasonable time to comply with the order before FERC commenced the license revocation proceeding. As a result, FERC revoked Eastern Hydro’s license for the East Juliette Project.
While environmental conservation groups asked FERC to require the licensee to remove all project facilities that it owns, FERC declined to do so. Instead, the FERC order requires that Eastern Hydro disable all of the project’s generating equipment to prevent operation of the project in violation of section 23(b)(1) of the Federal Power Act. Following revocation of the license, the FERC's jurisdiction will end, and authority over the site will pass to the State of Georgia’s dam regulatory authorities.
The East Juliette case illustrates some of the most severe consequences of failure to comply with FERC hydropower licenses. Without a license, the project cannot generate electricity, thus depriving the project of much of its value.
Energy powers society; society's choices shape energy policy. A blog about our energy resources and the choices they present for society.
Showing posts with label Georgia. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Georgia. Show all posts
TVA to lose largest industrial customer
Monday, June 10, 2013
The Tennessee Valley Authority is losing its largest industrial customer, a government-owned uranium enrichment plant. When the plant near Paducah, Kentucky closes next year, TVA will lose about 5 percent of its electricity sales, resulting in a loss of about $600
million in annual revenue. What does this mean for TVA and for its fleet of coal-fired electric generating facilities?
The Tennessee Valley Authority is the nation's largest public power provider and a corporation of the U.S. government. TVA provides electricity for about 9 million people in seven southeastern states: Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. TVA is independently financed, meaning it neither receives no taxpayer money nor retains any earnings as profits. It owns the most operating electric capacity of any utility in the U.S. (33,804 MW as of 2011), and leads the nation in both volume of annual energy sales (167,730 million kilowatt-hours) and annual revenue ($11.841 billion).
TVA's largest customer has been the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. Originally built by the U.S. Department of Energy to enrich uranium into fuel for U.S. nuclear power plants, the plant has been leased to and managed by USEC, Inc. since 1993. Paducah has been the nation's only facility for processing low-enriched uranium since 2001.
Last month, USEC announced that it plans to close the Paducah plant in 2014. When that happens, TVA will face a new, smaller landscape of demand for its power. As a result, some observers expect TVA to close the nearby Shawnee Fossil Plant. The Shawnee facility is a 1,200-megawatt coal-fired power plant built at the same time as the Paducah enrichment plant at a site about 2 miles away.
TVA has not yet indicated whether it will close Shawnee, but in recent months it has announced plans to close 3 other older coal-fired power plants: the Widows Creek Fossil Plant in northeast Alabama, and the John Sevier and Johnsonville fossil plants in Tennessee. On the other hand, TVA continues to modernize and invest in refurbishing other older coal-fired plants, including the Gallatin Fossil Plant near Nashville, Tennessee. TVA is investing about $1.1 billion in Gallatin to install pollution controls including sulfur dioxide capture technology.
How TVA responds to the loss of the Paducah uranium plant remains to be seen. TVA's relatively low rates for power may attract another large industrial customer to the region. If that happens, it may continue to operate the Shawnee facility and other plants that can be made economical. Otherwise, TVA may find itself faced with choices to mothball Shawnee or to do something else with its newfound surplus power.
The Tennessee Valley Authority is the nation's largest public power provider and a corporation of the U.S. government. TVA provides electricity for about 9 million people in seven southeastern states: Alabama, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Virginia. TVA is independently financed, meaning it neither receives no taxpayer money nor retains any earnings as profits. It owns the most operating electric capacity of any utility in the U.S. (33,804 MW as of 2011), and leads the nation in both volume of annual energy sales (167,730 million kilowatt-hours) and annual revenue ($11.841 billion).
TVA's largest customer has been the Paducah Gaseous Diffusion Plant. Originally built by the U.S. Department of Energy to enrich uranium into fuel for U.S. nuclear power plants, the plant has been leased to and managed by USEC, Inc. since 1993. Paducah has been the nation's only facility for processing low-enriched uranium since 2001.
Last month, USEC announced that it plans to close the Paducah plant in 2014. When that happens, TVA will face a new, smaller landscape of demand for its power. As a result, some observers expect TVA to close the nearby Shawnee Fossil Plant. The Shawnee facility is a 1,200-megawatt coal-fired power plant built at the same time as the Paducah enrichment plant at a site about 2 miles away.
TVA has not yet indicated whether it will close Shawnee, but in recent months it has announced plans to close 3 other older coal-fired power plants: the Widows Creek Fossil Plant in northeast Alabama, and the John Sevier and Johnsonville fossil plants in Tennessee. On the other hand, TVA continues to modernize and invest in refurbishing other older coal-fired plants, including the Gallatin Fossil Plant near Nashville, Tennessee. TVA is investing about $1.1 billion in Gallatin to install pollution controls including sulfur dioxide capture technology.
How TVA responds to the loss of the Paducah uranium plant remains to be seen. TVA's relatively low rates for power may attract another large industrial customer to the region. If that happens, it may continue to operate the Shawnee facility and other plants that can be made economical. Otherwise, TVA may find itself faced with choices to mothball Shawnee or to do something else with its newfound surplus power.
Cooling data centers with recycled water
Monday, March 19, 2012
Data centers are cropping up around the country, providing centralized computer server and storage capacity for both internet superstars like Google and Facebook as well as a much longer list of brick-and-mortar businesses. Data centers can consume significant amounts of electricity, so data center owners work hard to manage their energy costs and improve their energy efficiency.
Much of a data center's energy budget goes to keeping the servers and the building's airspace cool. Traditionally, this might include mechanical chillers -- effectively, powerful air conditioning units. To manage energy costs and environmental footprints, some data centers are turning to more passive cooling resources. Google recently announced that it is using recycled gray water from a local public water treatment facility to cool its data center in Douglas County, Georgia.
The Douglasville-Douglas County Water and Sewer Authority collects wastewater from local communities, treats it, and releases it into the Chattahoochee River. Google worked with the water and sewer authority to divert up to 30% of the water that would otherwise flow into the river to a special side-stream treatment plant. Once cleaned, this water is piped about 5 miles to Google's data center, where it is used for cooling.
Google's data center relies primarily on evaporative cooling. It takes energy to evaporate liquid water; as a consequence, you can use evaporating water to remove heat from air or other materials. (Think of the cooling effect of a dry breeze on wet skin.) Much of the water evaporates through this cooling process; Google sends any remaining cooling water to an on-site effluent treatment plant, from which the water is returned to the Chattahoochee River.
Using recycled water to cool data centers can save energy compared to mechanical chillers. Where clean water is scarce or expensive, the ability to use recycled water for cooling could also open up new capacity for data centers. Will more data centers turn to recycled gray water for evaporative cooling and energy cost management?
Much of a data center's energy budget goes to keeping the servers and the building's airspace cool. Traditionally, this might include mechanical chillers -- effectively, powerful air conditioning units. To manage energy costs and environmental footprints, some data centers are turning to more passive cooling resources. Google recently announced that it is using recycled gray water from a local public water treatment facility to cool its data center in Douglas County, Georgia.
The Douglasville-Douglas County Water and Sewer Authority collects wastewater from local communities, treats it, and releases it into the Chattahoochee River. Google worked with the water and sewer authority to divert up to 30% of the water that would otherwise flow into the river to a special side-stream treatment plant. Once cleaned, this water is piped about 5 miles to Google's data center, where it is used for cooling.
Google's data center relies primarily on evaporative cooling. It takes energy to evaporate liquid water; as a consequence, you can use evaporating water to remove heat from air or other materials. (Think of the cooling effect of a dry breeze on wet skin.) Much of the water evaporates through this cooling process; Google sends any remaining cooling water to an on-site effluent treatment plant, from which the water is returned to the Chattahoochee River.
Using recycled water to cool data centers can save energy compared to mechanical chillers. Where clean water is scarce or expensive, the ability to use recycled water for cooling could also open up new capacity for data centers. Will more data centers turn to recycled gray water for evaporative cooling and energy cost management?
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
