U.S. hydropower regulators have denied a request to extend the term of the country's first hydrokinetic project pilot license, instead holding that the original license's 10-year term should be enough time for the developer to complete testing and to decide whether to apply for a subsequent license.
At issue is Verdant Power, LLC's Roosevelt Island Tidal Energy Project No. 12611 (RITE Project). The 1,050-kilowatt hydrokinetic tidal project site is located in the East River near New York City. In 2012, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued the project a "pilot project license" under a newly developed process designed to allow entities to test new hydrokinetic technologies, identify appropriate sites, and confirm the technology's environmental or other effects. That pilot license allowed the construction, operation, and maintenance of the RITE Project for a 10-year period, expiring on December 31, 2021.
In 2017, the company described plans to install the pilot project's first phase in the 2019-2020 timeframe. On December 29, 2017, Verdant filed a request to extend the term of its pilot license for the RITE project by five years, to give it more time to acquire operational monitoring data that will inform subsequent phases of the pilot project and the relicense application.
But by order dated May 3, 2018, the Commission denied Verdant's request for a license extension. The Commission noted that the pilot license bore a 10-year term, twice as long Commission staff's original conceptions of hydrokinetic pilot project licenses for up to 5-year terms for testing purposes. The Commission noted, "Barring extraordinary circumstances, 10 years – double the period set forth in the white paper – should be enough time to complete a testing program and to make a decision on whether to file an application for subsequent license. Verdant has not demonstrated such circumstances."
Noting the remaining time left on Verdant's license, as well as the time left to Verdant before any application for a new license, the Commission denied the company's request for a license extension.
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 RITE. Show all posts
Showing posts with label RITE. Show all posts
Fish passage for hydrokinetic projects?
Thursday, May 17, 2012
Fishways are often found at dams to allow fish to pass upstream or downstream - but what does fish passage mean for dam-less hydrokinetic projects?
Hydrokinetic energy projects are an innovative way to produce electricity from moving water without building dams. Companies are developing a variety of technologies, many of which use water flowing in a river, ocean or tidal current to spin turbine-generator sets. Most grid-connected hydrokinetic projects are regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission under its authority over hydropower. This authority comes largely from the Federal Power Act, which requires the Commission to include certain terms in the hydropower project licenses it issues and gives it discretion to impose other conditions. For example, Section 18 of the Federal Power Act provides that the Commission shall require the construction, maintenance, and operation by a licensee of such fishways as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Commerce.
Hydrokinetic technologies are still fairly new, so only a handful of projects have received FERC licenses so far. Given that hydrokinetic projects do not include the construction of a new dam, one might not expect fish passage to be an issue, particularly at tidal or ocean sites. Indeed, it appears that for at least some hydrokinetic projects, fish passage may not be an issue. For example, when FERC issued a pilot project license to Verdant Power, LLC for its Roosevelt Island Tidal Energy Project in New York City's East River, the Commission did not include a reservation of the right to require a fishway in the license.
The Commission did include such a fishway reservation in the pilot license it granted to Ocean Renewable Power Company's Cobscook Bay Tidal project in Maine waters. In that case, the Secretary of the Interior cited important and highly valued populations of resident and migratory fish, including endangered Atlantic salmon. Although the Secretary did not prescribe a fishway at the time, Interior requested that the Commission reserve its authority to prescribe fishways under Section 18. When FERC granted ORPC's license, it included an article reserving the authority to require the licensee to construct, operate, and maintain, or to provide for the construction, operation, and maintenance of such fishways as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior.
Although the project licensee later requested an exemption from this article because its project is not a dam and will not create any impoundment, the Commission declined to amend the license. Explaining its reasoning, the Commission pointed to the policy it developed from its traditional hydropower licensing: if the Secretary of the Interior or Commerce so requests, the Commission will include an article reserving the Commission’s authority to require the construction and operation of fishways to preserve the requesting Secretary's future right to to prescribe fishways under Section 18.
What a possible fishway system for a tidal hydrokinetic project remains to be seen, as does whether FERC will impose such a requirement on any operating projects. If the Secretary of the Interior or Commerce prescribes a fishway, FERC can assert its jurisdiction under Section 18 to require fishway installation. Factors that could lead to such a decision may include the particular fish species and resources at each project's site, and a project's actual impacts on those fish.
Hydrokinetic energy projects are an innovative way to produce electricity from moving water without building dams. Companies are developing a variety of technologies, many of which use water flowing in a river, ocean or tidal current to spin turbine-generator sets. Most grid-connected hydrokinetic projects are regulated by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission under its authority over hydropower. This authority comes largely from the Federal Power Act, which requires the Commission to include certain terms in the hydropower project licenses it issues and gives it discretion to impose other conditions. For example, Section 18 of the Federal Power Act provides that the Commission shall require the construction, maintenance, and operation by a licensee of such fishways as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior or the Secretary of Commerce.
Hydrokinetic technologies are still fairly new, so only a handful of projects have received FERC licenses so far. Given that hydrokinetic projects do not include the construction of a new dam, one might not expect fish passage to be an issue, particularly at tidal or ocean sites. Indeed, it appears that for at least some hydrokinetic projects, fish passage may not be an issue. For example, when FERC issued a pilot project license to Verdant Power, LLC for its Roosevelt Island Tidal Energy Project in New York City's East River, the Commission did not include a reservation of the right to require a fishway in the license.
The Commission did include such a fishway reservation in the pilot license it granted to Ocean Renewable Power Company's Cobscook Bay Tidal project in Maine waters. In that case, the Secretary of the Interior cited important and highly valued populations of resident and migratory fish, including endangered Atlantic salmon. Although the Secretary did not prescribe a fishway at the time, Interior requested that the Commission reserve its authority to prescribe fishways under Section 18. When FERC granted ORPC's license, it included an article reserving the authority to require the licensee to construct, operate, and maintain, or to provide for the construction, operation, and maintenance of such fishways as may be prescribed by the Secretary of the Interior.
Although the project licensee later requested an exemption from this article because its project is not a dam and will not create any impoundment, the Commission declined to amend the license. Explaining its reasoning, the Commission pointed to the policy it developed from its traditional hydropower licensing: if the Secretary of the Interior or Commerce so requests, the Commission will include an article reserving the Commission’s authority to require the construction and operation of fishways to preserve the requesting Secretary's future right to to prescribe fishways under Section 18.
What a possible fishway system for a tidal hydrokinetic project remains to be seen, as does whether FERC will impose such a requirement on any operating projects. If the Secretary of the Interior or Commerce prescribes a fishway, FERC can assert its jurisdiction under Section 18 to require fishway installation. Factors that could lead to such a decision may include the particular fish species and resources at each project's site, and a project's actual impacts on those fish.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
