FERC issues license for Monongahela Locks and Dam 4 project

U.S. hydropower regulators have issued an original license for a proposed 12-megawatt hydropower project, to be located at the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers’ Monongahela Locks and Dam 4 facility on the Monongahela River, in Pennsylvania.

On February 27, 2014, FFP New Hydro, LLC subsidiary Solia 4 Hydroelectric, LLC filed, pursuant to Part I of the Federal Power Act, an application for a license to construct, operate, and maintain the Monongahela Locks and Dam 4 Hydroelectric Project No. 13767.  The company is affiliated with US Renewables Group.

The project would be located at one of the nine existing lock and dam sites on the Monongahela River, which the Army Corps operates for commercial and recreational navigation.  If developed, new facilities for the project would include an intake channel, spill gates, a powerhouse housing two equally sized Kaplan turbine-generator units with a combined capacity of 12 MW, a tailrace channel, a substation, a transmission line, and an access road.  The project will operate in a run-of-release mode, using flows made available by the Corps that would normally be released through the Corps’ spillway gates

Under the Federal Power Act, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is charged with regulating and reviewing applications for most non-federal hydropower projects.  Because the project uses the water power or surplus water of a government dam, occupies federal land, and is located on the Monongahela River, which is a navigable waterway of the United States, the Commission concluded that the project is required to be licensed pursuant to section 23(b)(1) of the Federal Power Act.

On July 21, 2017, the Commission issued its Order Issuing Original License for the Monongahela Locks and Dam 4 project.  The license authorizes the installation of 12 MW of new, renewable energy capacity, while requiring a number of measures to protect water quality, fish, wildlife, recreation, and cultural resources at the project.  It bears a 50-year term, the maximum allowable for an original license under Section 6 of the Federal Power Act.

According to the order, as licensed with mandatory conditions and staff-recommended measures, the levelized annual cost of constructing and operating the project will be about $3,563,340, or $72.88/MWh.  Its expected average annual generation will be 48,894 MW. 

The Commission noted that the project as licensed is best adapted to a comprehensive plan for improving or developing the Monongahela River, "because: (1) issuance of an original license will serve to provide a beneficial and dependable source of electric energy; (2) the required environmental measures will protect and enhance fish and wildlife resources, water quality, recreation resources, and historic properties; and (3) the 12 MW of electric capacity will come from a renewable resource that does not contribute to atmospheric pollution."

Alta, snowmaking pipes and conduit hydro power

Federal energy regulators have issued Alta Ski Area a written determination that its proposed micro-hydropower project will not be required to be licensed under the Federal Power Act.  If developed, Alta's project would be one of the first to generate electricity from a snowmaking water supply pipeline.

Most grid-connected hydropower projects in the U.S. fall under the Federal Power Act, and generally require a license or exemption from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.  The process of securing an original license or exemption for a new project can take years and have high costs.  But under a 2013 law, some so-called "conduit" hydro projects -- using pipelines and other existing manmade water conveyances -- can be developed and operated without a license or exemption.  The Hydropower Regulatory Efficiency Act of 2013 defined criteria for the Commission to declare a project to be a "qualifying conduit hydropower facility," and provided that such facilities are not required to be licensed or exempted from licensing under the Federal Power Act.  Key factors include the use of a non-federally owned, manmade water conveyance that is operated for the distribution of water for agricultural, municipal, or industrial consumption and not primarily for the generation of electricity.  If the Commission determines that a project qualifies, it can be built and maintained without a FERC license or exemption.

Under the Commission's process for evaluating conduit hydro projects, the developer must file a notice of intent to construct a qualifying conduit hydropower facility.  If the developer's filing demonstrates that the project meets the statutory criteria, the Commission will issue a notice of its preliminary decision that the project qualifies.  Following a 45-day period within which others may contest the determination, assuming no adverse facts are uncovered, the Commission issues a letter constituting its written determination that the proposed project meets the qualifying conduit hydropower facility criteria.

Alta's course before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission followed this trail.  In May 2016, Alta filed its notice of intent to construct the Alta Micro-Hydro Project.  That notice and a supplemental filing described a project to tap the existing underground 6-inch-diameter snowmaking water supply pipeline delivering water from Cecret Lake to the Wildcat Pump House.  Parallel to that pipeline, Alta would add a new powerhouse with a 75-kilowatt turbine/generating unit.  Later that month, Commission staff issued a public notice that preliminarily determined that the project met the statutory criteria.  After the 45-day contest period, during which no interventions or comments were filed, in July the Commission issued Alta a written determination that the Alta Micro-Hydro Project meets the qualifying criteria under section 30(a) of the Federal Power Act, and is not required to be licensed under Part I of that law.

The Commission's letter reminds Alta that qualifying conduit hydropower facilities remain subject to other applicable federal, state, and local laws and regulations.  But the ability to develop a conduit hydropower project without requiring a license from the FERC will ease the project's regulatory path.  So far, most projects that have qualified for the conduit hydropower program have been proposed by water districts.  But as ski areas seek to align their operations with sustainability goals, adding low-impact renewable electricity generation may make sense for some.  If Alta's micro-hydro project is successful, other ski areas with existing snowmaking or other water infrastructure over a sufficient vertical drop may follow suit by developing their own conduit hydropower projects.

Edgartown's Muskeget tidal project faces questions

A municipal tidal power project proposed for the Massachusetts island of Martha's Vineyard faces federal deadlines if its licensing process is to continue.  The Muskeget Channel Tidal Energy Project, proposed by the Town of Edgartown, is seeking a pilot project license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission -- but faces questions from Commission staff.

On February 1, 2011, the Town of Edgartown filed, pursuant to the Commission’s pilot licensing procedures, a draft license application for the proposed Muskeget Channel Tidal Energy Project.  The project would feature an array of 14 marine hydrokinetic tidal turbines, with a commercial generating capacity of 5 megawatts or less.

But that license application remains incomplete.  On April 1, 2011, Commission staff issued a letter requesting that Edgartown provide additional information, including details about the proposed project and multiple plans, drawings, and reports.  Over the ensuing years, Edgartown filed some responsive information, but according to the Commission, Edgartown did not file the remaining information by the deadline or provide a schedule indicating when the information would be filed after the deadline was missed.

Over two years after the deadline, on April 21, 2016, Commission staff issued a letter requiring Edgartown to show cause, within 30 days, why Commission staff should not terminate the prefiling licensing process for the project.  According to the Commission, Edgartown did not respond, but Congressman William Keating asked the Commission to extend the show cause deadline until the Massachusetts Clean Energy Commission decides whether to award the project a grant.

In a June 2 letter, Commission staff directed Edgartown to, within 30 days, provide a schedule specifying when it will file with the Commission each of the outstanding items requested in Commission staff’s April 1, 2011 letter.  The letter says, "Upon receipt of this information, Commission staff will make a determination on how to proceed with the incomplete application for the Muskeget Channel Tidal Energy Project."  For now, the prelicensing process for the Muskeget tidal project remains pending.

Block Island offshore wind celebrated, challenged

U.S. and Rhode Island officials recently celebrated the start of construction on the Block Island Wind Farm, which is on track to be the first commercial offshore wind farm in the U.S.  The five-turbine, 30-megawatt project under development by Deepwater Wind is scheduled to come online in 2016; turbine foundation construction and other "steel in the water" activities are underway.  As a pioneer in U.S. offshore wind development, the Block Island project has survived years of permitting uncertainty and repeated legal challenges by project opponents.  But another such lawsuit was filed this week in federal court.  What does the future hold for the Block Island Wind Farm?

Project developer Deepwater Wind is owned principally by an entity of the D.E. Shaw group.  Its Block Island project is currently under construction in Rhode Island state waters about three nautical miles southeast of Block Island.  The project will feed power directly to consumers on Block Island, but also includes a 25-mile bi-directional submerged transmission cable between Block Island and the mainland. The project's finances rest in part on a power purchase agreement through which Deepwater Wind will sell power to utility National Grid.

That power purchase agreement, or PPA, has been the subject of several legal challenges.  Those challenges often cite the deal's cost: pricing for the Block Island power starts as high as 24.4 cents per kilowatt-hour, and escalates 3.5 percent annually.  These prices are more than double the typical Rhode Island energy price, for an estimated $497 million in above-market costs over the 20-year deal.

In 2009 and early 2010, the Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission rejected proposals by Deepwater Wind and National Grid, largely over cost.  The parties then returned with a revised proposal.  In 2010, TransCanada Power Marketing Ltd. unsuccessfully argued that the Rhode Island commission shouldn't consider that proposal due to constitutional infirmities in the Rhode Island law favoring renewable power contracts with in-state projects.  On August 16, 2010, the Commission issued its order approving the PPA.  After that order was appealed to the state Supreme Court, the Supreme Court issued a written opinion upholding the Commission's Order on July 1, 2011.  In 2012 and in 2015, project opponents petitioned the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to invalidate the Rhode Island commission's action, which FERC declined to do.  Through all this, the project moved forward and ultimately began local construction earlier this year.

But the project is not yet completely out of stormy seas.  On August 14, 2015, plaintiffs with a history of engagement in some of these earlier challenges filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Rhode Island.  As in previous challenges, this complaint argues that the Rhode Island Public Utilities Commission violated federal laws in approving the Block Island deal because only the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission may regulate wholesale electricity sales.  While it is possible that this case could be swiftly dismissed, if it lingers it could add uncertainty to the project until its resolution.  Last year a federal court invalidated a FERC ruling on the grounds that it impermissibly tread on state rights to set retail electricity rates.  That case, Electric Power Supply Association v. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, has been appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.

With construction underway, the Block Island project now has significant inertia behind it.  What impact will the recently filed lawsuit have?  Will it affect Deepwater Wind's position as "first in the water" in the race for U.S. commercial offshore wind development?

FERC authorizes mine drainage microhydro

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission has issued a hydropower license to a project whose turbines generate electricity from acid mine drainage. The micro-hydropower license issued to the Antrim Treatment Trust illustrates this unusual approach to the twin challenges of mine remediation and renewable energy.

The power of falling water, in the White Mountain National Forest in New Hampshire.

In the 1980s, Antrim Mining, Inc. operated a surface bituminous coal mine in Pennsylvania.  When water draining through the mine and into streams and rivers was found to exceed pollution limits, the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania charged the company with violations of mining and reclamation law.  The charges led to a series of settlements through which Antrim agreed to improved water treatment facilities, including an off-the-grid hydroelectric facility.  This micro-hydro plant would be powered by treated effluent flowing downhill out of lagoons.  Antrim created the Antrim Treatment Trust to manage treatment of the mine water in 1991, then went out of business.

In an attempt to reduce the cost of treating the site's severe acid mine drainage, the Babb Creek Watershed Association identified micro-hydropower as an option for the site.  In 2008, the association received an Energy Harvest Grant from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection.  This $428,710 award was designed to support the installation of two hydroelectric turbines on the treatment plant's discharge, which was completed in 2012.

While the Federal Power Act requires most hydropower projects to secure a license from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, some off-grid hydropower projects that do not use the waters of the United States do not require licensure.  In 2010, the Antrim Treatment Trust filed a Declaration of
Intent for a 40-kilowatt grid-connected project, but quickly revised its project to be off-grid after the Commission issued an order finding that a license was required for the grid-connected project.  Once the project was off-grid, the Commission ruled that no license was required.

The Antrim treatment plant seems to have then operated one turbine, but left the second turbine non-operational. A 2012 article in the Williamsport Sun-Gazette suggested that with both turbines running and selling power into the electricity grid, the treatment plant could cut $12,000 in annual power costs and make $10,000 per year in new revenue.  But this could require a FERC license, because the project would become connected to the utility grid.

The Trust appears to have decided that these economics were worth pursuing, because in 2013 it filed an application for a project license for a 40-kilowatt project.  In the application, Antrim Trust proposed to bring a second identical turbine (currently in place but non-operational) online by installing additional indoor wiring with appurtenances within the existing powerhouse and treatment plant, and operate both turbines as a grid-connected project using the treated and/or untreated water.

As licensed, the Commission estimates the annual cost to develop and maintain the proposed 40-kW project is $9,356 or $37.42/megawatt-hour (MWh).  The project will generate an estimated average of 250 MWh of energy annually.  Based on Commission staff’s view of the alternative cost of power ($56.93/MWh), the total value of the project’s power is $14,233 in 2013 dollars.  To determine whether the proposed project is currently economically beneficial, staff subtracts the project’s cost from the value of the project’s power. Therefore, in the first year of operation, the project is expected to cost $4,877 or $19.51/MWh less than the likely alternative cost of power - demonstrating economic benefit.

Micro-hydropower projects can make economic sense in some mine drainage situations and other places where water treatment is required and a suitable vertical drop or pressure is available.  In Antrim's case, the project's success can partially be explained by the existence and purpose of the Trust, as well as the DEP grant to support project construction.  If treated and untreated mine drainage can be used to generate hydroelectricity, what other unusual sources of power will arise?

Tidal power past, present, and future at Tide Mill Institute 2013

The Tide Mill Institute held its ninth annual conference this past Friday and Saturday.  About 60 people interested in the past, present, and future of tidal energy gathered at the Topsfield Historical Society's Gould Barn in Massachusetts.  The audience included developers of recreated historic tide mills and modern tidal power projects, inventors of tidal turbine technology, academics, state legislators, historians, architects, and other enthusiasts of tidal power.

Tide Mill Institute's John Goff speaks about historic tide mills in Salem, Massachusetts.

Ocean Renewable Power Company's president and CEO, Chris Sauer, gave the keynote presentation on ORPC's efforts and success in developing modern hydrokinetic tidal power plants in the Gulf of Maine and elsewhere.  Chris described the research and development process that led to ORPC's Turbine Generator Unit or TGU.  He also described the engineering, regulatory, and commercial challenges of developing tidal power plants today, as well as ORPC's approach to overcoming these challenges.

Other presentations included: Professor Kerr Canning's exposition of a tide mill site he discovered on the Apple River in Nova Scotia; Professor Robert Gordon's look at tide mill mechanics at sites in York, Maine; a review of tide mill history on the Gowanus Canal in Brooklyn, New York, by Angela Kramer of the Brooklyn Historical Society and Proteus Gowanus; and a survey by representatives of local historical societies of tide mills on the North Shore of Massachusetts.

Tide Mill Institute members and attendees also enjoyed displays on historic and modern tide power projects, and informal discussions of archaeological discoveries and modern developments. 

The Tide Mill Institute will hold its 10th annual conference in 2014.

UK opens world's largest offshore wind farm

The United Kingdom has officially opened the London Array, the world's largest offshore wind project. 

Built by a consortium of developers including DONG Energy, utility E.ON, and Masdar, the $2.3 billion project consists of 175 Siemens 3.6-megawatt turbines with a nameplate capacity of 630 megawatts. Each turbine sports three blades with an overall diameter of 117 meters.  The project is located about 20 kilometers off London.

The project is owned by its lead developers.  DONG Energy, Denmark's largest energy company, owns 50%.  E.ON, parent of the world's largest investor-owned electric utility, owns 30%.  Masdar, Abu Dhabi's renewable energy company, has a 20% stake in the project.

The addition of the London Array brings the United Kingdom to about 3.3 gigawatts of installed offshore wind capacity. 

US first tidal project to come online

The nation's first commercial, grid-connected tidal energy project is scheduled to go live this month, as Ocean Renewable Power Company plans to start delivering power to the grid from its Cobscook Bay Tidal Energy Project.

A scene from the Maine coast: Crow Island off Great Cranberry Island, about 100 miles west of the Cobscook Bay Tidal Energy Project.

Earlier this year, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued an pilot project license to Ocean Renewable Power Company Maine, LLC for its Cobscook project near Eastport, Maine.  The initial phase of ORPC's project involves a hydrokinetic turbine connected to a generator capable of producing up to 180 kilowatts of energy; after monitoring this turbine for a year, ORPC plans to expand the project to a capacity of 3 megawatts.

ORPC also won a 20-year power purchase agreement to sell the projects' output to Maine's three large electric utilities at a price escalating from 21.5 cents per kilowatt-hour.  That PPA was the result of a Maine law creating a competitive process for marine renewable energy developers to secure offtake agreements.

In a filing with the FERC earlier this week, ORPC announced that it anticipates delivering power from the Cobscook project to the mainland Bangor Hydro Electric Co. grid starting today.  According to the filing, this initial power delivery is part of the project's commissioning phase, with commencement of commercial operation expected by September 20.

Hydrokinetic projects -- generating electricity from tides, waves, and free-flowing rivers -- is a new sector of the U.S. energy portfolio.  Studies suggest that hydrokinetic resources have great potential, with tidal energy's electric production potential estimated to be 2.38 terawatt-hours per year, equal to an average power of 270 MW.  Wave energy appears to provide the larger resource, with an estimated electricity production potential of about approximately 260 TWh/yr (equal to an average power of 30,000 MW), with river in-stream electricity production potential estimated at approximately 110 TWh/yr.

EIA data on electricity generator costs

What does it cost to build a new power plant?  The answer depends on the technology used and other factors - but the U.S. Energy Information Administration publishes a useful reference presenting its analysis of the so-called "overnight cost" of building new centralized electricity generation stations using a variety of technologies.

Each year, the EIA publishes an Annual Energy Outlook containing projections for the upcoming year.  This outlook considers a variety of potential future outcomes based on factors like changes in the demand for electricity or variations in fuel pricing.

Underlying the outlook is a series of assumptions about factors including the demand for electricity.  A document released last week by EIA looks at a variety of new central station electricity generating technologies, and provides cost and performance characteristics for each.

One section of the data focuses on the total overnight cost of new projects initiated in 2011, defined as the overnight capital cost including contingency factors, excluding regional multipliers, learning effects, and interest.  According to EIA, advanced combustion turbines have the lowest overnight cost: $666 per kilowatt (in 2010 dollars).  By contrast, municipal solid waste - landfill gas facilities have the highest overnight cost: $8,233 per kW.  Other technologies fall between these two extremes.

Capital cost is only one piece of the puzzle; variable and fixed operations and maintenance costs also play a major role in the economics of electric generation.  According to EIA, variable O&M costs range from zero per megawatt-hour (for onshore and offshore wind, and solar thermal and photovoltaic) to $14.70 per MWh for a conventional combustion turbine.  Fixed O&M costs range from as low as $6.70 per kilowatt for advanced combustion turbines to as high as $378.76 per kW for MSW - landfill gas facilities.

Not every technology is appropriate for any given site, and economic considerations must be matched with environmental, siting, and other factors in choosing power plant technologies needed to meet consumer demand.  EIA's data is also aggregated and analytically-derived, meaning individual projects will likely have capital or O&M costs that deviate from these averages.  Nevertheless the EIA data illustrates some of the dynamics underlying our future energy mix - will we build facilities with low capital costs but higher O&M costs, more expensive facilities with lower O&M costs -- or can we find technologies that perform well in all categories?

Pittsfield NH dam repowering project

As governments and businesses consider the hydroelectric potential of existing non-powered dams, competition is heating up to claim and evaluate the best sites.  Federal regulators yesterday resolved a conflict between two developers by awarding a preliminary permit to a developer interested in studying the feasibility of repowering or rebuilding hydroelectric energy production at an existing mill dam on the Suncook River in Pittsfield, New Hampshire.

Another former mill dam in the heart of a New England village: the Doughty Dam in North Berwick, Maine.

Yesterday's order by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (9-page PDF) granted a preliminary permit to KC Hydro LLC of New Hampshire to study the feasibility of the Pittsfield Mill Dam Hydropower Project.  Originally built for industrial purposes, the Pittsfield Mill Dam is currently owned by the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services.

As described in KC Hydro's original permit application (11-page PDF), the project concept involved either restoring an existing but mothballed 415 kW turbine which previously operated under an exemption from licensing, or installing entirely new facilities (potentially with a 530 kW capacity) to capture the hydroelectric potential of the water already impounded behind the dam.

After KC Hydro submitted its preliminary permit, another developer - AMENICO Green Solutions, LLC - applied for a competing preliminary permit for the same site.  AMENICO proposed a similar project, which focused on restoring the existing 415 kW turbine.  AMENICO noted that it had property rights to the site, which it claimed KC Hydro did not.

Noting that the applications were comparable, FERC recited its standard for resolving the competing claims:

Staff has reviewed the applications and found no basis for concluding that either applicant’s plan is superior to the other. Neither applicant has presented a plan based on detailed studies or the results of agency consultation. Where the plans of the applicants are equally well adapted to develop, conserve, and utilize in the public interest the water resources of the region, the Commission will favor the applicant with the earliest application acceptance date.

Because KC Hydro had applied first, FERC awarded the preliminary permit to KC Hydro.  In doing so, FERC noted that a permit applicant is not required to have obtained all access rights to a project site as a condition of receiving a preliminary permit.  However, FERC did note that a preliminary permit does not grant a right of entry onto any lands, so a permittee must obtain any necessary authorizations and comply with any applicable laws and regulations to conduct any field studies.

With its preliminary permit in hand, KC Hydro now has 3 years to investigate the site and apply for a full project license.  Will the Pittsfield dam ultimately be repowered?

Pilgrim nuclear plant down temporarily

The Pilgrim Nuclear Power Station in Plymouth, Massachusetts, was shut down temporarily yesterday due to an apparent malfunction. Media reports suggest a problem with a condenser, a piece of equipment that converts the steam produced by the plant back into water.

Nuclear power plants typically produce electricity by using fissile nuclear material to produce heat. This thermal energy vaporizes water into steam. In turn, this steam spins one or more turbines, each of which is connected to an electric generator. In this regard, nuclear power plants' reliance on steam resembles other thermal power plants such as those fired by combustion fuels like coal or biomass.

As with many other steam-based power plants, nuclear power plants often include steam condensers. A steam condenser takes the steam that is passed through the turbines and converts it back into liquid water. This enables the turbines to extract more energy from the flow of steam, and improves plant efficiency. It appears that a condenser at the Pilgrim station stopped working, leading to a shutdown of the plant.

Any time major equipment at a nuclear power plant sales or malfunctions, operators typically take it very seriously.  Plant owner Entergy has reportedly said that it will not restart the plant until it figures out what went wrong.

Pilgrim Station is a relatively large generating facility, capable of producing up to 688 megawatts of power. The plant was reportedly operating at 30% of its capacity prior to yesterday's shutdown. As result, the short-term impacts on electricity markets in New England may be relatively minimal. However, if the plant continues to be down for an extended period of time, particularly as temperatures heat up and air-conditioning loads increase, the region may experience marginally higher power pricing as result of the shutdown.

The Pilgrim plant is also undergoing a relicensing process through the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Incremental hydropower tax incentives

Upgrading existing hydroelectric facilities to improve their efficiency or capacity can be cost-effective.  Not only will the plant produce more electricity more efficiently, but the upgrades may qualify the facility for a tax incentive designed to spur the development of new renewable electricity generation.  For example, installing inflatable flashboards or high-efficiency turbine runners could qualify a project for an energy production tax credit of 1.1¢/kWh. 

As part of the sweeping Energy Policy Act of 2005, Congress amended section 45 of the Internal Revenue Code to expand the renewable electricity production tax credit (or PTC) to incremental production gains from efficiency improvements or capacity additions to existing hydroelectric facilities.  Eligible improvements must be placed in service after August 8, 2005, and before January 1, 2014. 

To qualify incremental hydroelectric generation for the tax credit, the project owner applies to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission under section 1301(c).  The Commission is required to certify the “historic average annual hydropower production” and the “percentage of average annual hydropower production at the facility attributable to the efficiency improvements or additions of capacity” placed in service during that time period.  The applicant is then able to take the production tax credit for the incremental amount of electric energy produced as a result of the upgrades.

While a credit of 1.1¢/kWh may seem small, hydroelectric projects typically produce relatively large amounts of electric energy at a relatively low operating cost.  Depending on the energy market, at times the tax credit may be worth half as much as the value of the underlying energy.  Also, in this context, the tax credit is only available for the incremental generation produced above the historic baseline; thus allowing incremental hydropower production to qualify for the PTC arguably rewards investment in upgrades.

At the same time, the continued availability of the tax credit for any kind of renewable electricity is in doubt.  Under current law, most renewable resources must be placed in service by the end of 2013 to qualify for the production tax credit.  Wind energy projects must be placed in service by the end of 2012.  Congress is considering whether to renew the tax credit, as it has done a number of times since it was first enacted in 1992.   According to a Congressional Budget Office report released this month, tax credits for renewable energy sources cost the government $1.4 billion in fiscal year 2011.

Proposed Long Canyon energy project

Last week the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission accepted for filing an application for a preliminary permit for a pumped storage project in the Utah desert.  In January, Utah Independent Power, Inc. filed for a preliminary permit.  The Long Canyon Pumped Storage Project would entail two dams to store water drawn from the Colorado River near Moab, Utah.  (Here's a topographic map of the general location.)

A water pipe buried in the desert soil in Arches National Park, near Moab, Utah.

Pumped storage projects are one way to store energy.  Electricity that is generated can be converted into potential energy stored in water by pumping it uphill.  That energy, or most of it, can be captured and converted back into electricity on command.

Utah Independent Power's application to FERC for a preliminary permit for the Long Canyon Pumped Storage Project (18-page PDF) provides some details on how the project might work.  Initially, water from the river would be pumped into the lower reservoir.  When electricity is abundant and low-priced, the project would consume electricity to pump water from the lower reservoir uphill to the upper reservoir.  When electricity is scarce or commands a high enough price, the project would release water downhill through turbines to produce up to 800 megawatts of hydroelectric energy.  In a typical pumped storage project, the same pumps used to send water uphill can be used as turbines when the water flows back down.  The owned of a pumped storage project seeks to earn profits by taking advantage of the difference between off-peak energy prices and the prices available during peak demand.

Now that the Commission has accepted the application for filing, the application is open for 60 days for public comment or a showing of interest in the site by a competing developer.  After that period, and after a technical and legal review of the application by Commission staff, the Commission may issue a preliminary permit to the applicant.  A preliminary permit does not authorize the permittee to actually construct anything; rather, it confers first priority of application for a license - what the Commission calls "guaranteed first-to-file status" - while the permittee studies the site and prepares to apply for a license, typically for a term of 3 years.

Cobscook tidal project environmental review

A tidal energy project proposed in Maine has passed an initial federal environmental review.  Federal regulators have released an environmental assessment of the Cobscook Bay Tidal Energy Project (182-page PDF), finding generally that licensing the hydrokinetic project with appropriate environmental protective measures would not constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment.

The Cobscook Bay project is proposed by Ocean Renewable Power Company Maine, LLC.  ORPC proposes to develop a 300 kilowatt hydrokinetic project in Cobscook Bay near the city of Eastport and the town of Lubec, Maine.  The project entails five cross-flow hydrokinetic turbine generator units, each with a rated capacity of 60 kW.  According to FERC, the project's construction will cost an estimated $11.5 million, with operation and maintenance adding $146,000 per year.  Staff's analysis suggests that during its first year of operation, the project would produce power at a cost that is $1.3 million more than the cost of alternative power (or about 1 cent per kWh above alternative power).

ORPC Maine has applied to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission for an 8-year pilot license for the Cobscook project.  Under the National Environmental Policy Act, federal agencies must evaluate the environmental impacts of agency actions such as issuing licenses for energy projects.  Performing an environmental assessment is one step in the NEPA process.  If the agency concludes that issuing the license would have relatively minor environmental impacts, as the FERC did for the Cobscook project, it can avoid the more stringent review process of preparing an environmental impact statement.

In the Cobscook project's environmental assessment, FERC staff recommended licensing the project with several additional modifications.  FERC invites public comment for 30 days following publication of notice of the environmental assessment.

Alaska proposes large new dam

The Alaska Energy Authority has filed key documents with federal regulators giving formal notice of its intent to build the proposed 600 megawatt Susitna-Watana Hydroelectric Project.  If this project is approved and built, it will be the largest hydroelectric project developed in the U.S. since 1966.

Plans to develop a large-scale hydropower project on the Susitna river have been considered for decades.  In 2010, the Alaska Legislature established a goal of providing half of the state’s electric power from renewable sources by 2025.  The Alaska Energy Authority, a public corporation of the state whose mission is to use Alaska's natural resources to produce electricity and lower costs, concluded that Alaska could not meet the 50% renewable goal without building a major new hydroelectric project.

On December 29, 2011, the Alaska Energy Authority filed a notification of intent to file an application for a hydroelectric license and a pre-application document with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission.  FERC docketed the project as No. 14241.  (You can read these documents in FERC's eLibrary here.)

In those documents, the Alaska Energy Authority described the project as located about 180 miles north of Anchorage.  The dam itself would be large: 700 to 800 feet in height, and with a crest length of over 2,700 feet.  The dam would impound a 39-mile-long reservoir, flooding 20,000 acres and capable of storing about 2,400,000 acre-feet.  The Authority plans to install three 200 MW turbine-generator sets for a total installed capacity of 600 MW, but is considering up to 800 MW of capacity.

The Authority expects the FERC hydropower licensing process to take up to 6 years.  The size and impacts of the project make it attractive to some yet controversial to others.  Public comments are already being filed in the FERC docket.

April 7, 2011 - DOE loan guarantees not dead yet

Check out the piece I wrote for the Offshore Wind Wire analyzing the potential value in the race to build larger offshore wind projects and larger turbine generators: cheaper electricity thanks to the economy of scale.

Earlier this week, I looked at the Department of Energy's loan guarantee programs.  In the past 6 years, DOE has backstopped $26 billion in financing for 21 energy projects.  As Congress wrestles with the U.S. federal budget, these loan programs may be on the chopping block; the current Republican draft budget makes significant cuts to DOE's loan program funding.

The battle over DOE's loan programs is not yet over.  Today a dozen Democratic senators submitted a letter urging Senate leadership to preserve the current levels of loan program funding.  Led by Senator Maria Cantwell of Washington, other signatories include Senators Mary Landrieu (LA), Carl Levin (MI), Jeff Bingaman (NM), Ron Wyden (OR), Chris Coons (DE), Barbara Boxer (CA), Tim Johnson (SD), Jeanne Shaheen (NH), Jeff Merkley (OR), Tom Harkin (IA), and Dianne Feinstein (CA).  Will this be enough to sway the Senate to preserve DOE's funding level for its loan programs?

February 7, 2011 - $50 million more for offshore wind

Offshore wind just got another boost.   Today Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar and Secretary of Energy Steven Chu released a joint National Offshore Wind Strategy, which bills itself as the first-ever interagency plan on offshore wind energy.  As part of this strategy, the U.S. Department of Energy envisions 10 gigawatts of offshore wind generating capacity by 2020 and 54 gigawatts by 2030.

That's not all: the Secretaries also announced up to $50.5 million in new funding for projects that support offshore wind energy deployment.  The plan includes three solicitations, proposing to award up to $50.5 million over 5 years, to promote offshore wind R&D and eliminate market barriers.  Up to $25 million will be available for technology development for wind turbine design tools and hardware.  Up to $18 million will be available for studies and research to identify and remove market barriers.  Up to $7.5 more million will bne used to fund R&D into wind turbine drivetrains.

The announcement also includes the designation under the "Smart from the Start" program of high priority Wind Energy Areas on the Outer Continental Shelf (OCS) offshore of Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, and Virginia.  To reduce the burden on project developers, these areas will receive advanced environmental reviews by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement (BOEMRE).  If BOEMRE's review does not identify any significant impacts, leases could be available by the end of this year.

August 25, 2010 - tidal energy; sewage anaerobic digestion

What is the first federal facility anywhere to use tidal power as an energy source?  A Coast Guard station in Eastport, Maine is claiming the title with its project to install Ocean Renewable Power Company's tidal energy turbine and generator.  ORPC installed a 60 kW tidal turbine and generator in March 2010.  Last week, ORPC announced that the unit had commenced powering the Coast Guard's 41' utility boat with electricity of a quality compatible with being grid-tied.  Yesterday, in Eastport, there was a celebration of the project's successes and promises.

Lewiston and Auburn, two of Maine's largest sister cities on either side of the Androscoggin River, share sewer treatment services through the Lewiston-Auburn Water Pollution Control Authority.  Currently, the plant treats 12.7 million gallons of sewage per day.  This process results in two major products: clean water, and the solids that (in technical ways, if not semantically) make up the difference between sewage and water.  The authority mixes about half of the solids with wood to make a marketable compost, but has to pay to dispose the remaining solids.  Now, the authority is considering installing an anaerobic digestion plant.  This plant would have two major effects.  First, it would significantly reduce the mass of solids requiring disposal -- up to a 40% reduction.  Where that mass would go produces the second major effect of the plant: through anaerobic digestion, combustible gas (primarily methane) is produced from the solids.  This gas can be burned in a gas turbine, which can be tied to a generator.  For Lewiston-Auburn, gas production is estimated at 170,000 cubic feet of methane per day; the authority estimates that it can produce 2/3 of its own electricity requirements from this fuel stream. The cost?  $16.6 million.  On September 8, the board of the authority will vote on the project.

The public debate over wind energy's merits continues with this letter to the Lewiston Sun Journal critical of developing wind near small towns and mountains in Maine.  Claims made include "they will not produce enough energy to make a dent in our needs, but it will make some investors very rich" and "the energy will be sold out of state".

Copper theft is an issue in Maine.  Copper is valuable for its scrap value.  Thieves strike utility infrastructure as well as homes.  Here's a news report of a thief busted for stealing the copper piping from a house listed for sale.

August 5, 2010 - Patriot Place gets solar power; integrating wind into the grid

 
 Solar power in action: making wind, pushing sails past Ram Island Light, Boothbay Harbor, Maine.

Several large utilities including Duke Energy Corp. have reported significantly increased power sales for the second quarter of 2010, particularly from industrial customers.  Duke now projects that 2010 power sales will rise 2%.  At its midwestern operating companies, Duke noted 20% growth in industrial power sales.

Here's a short letter to the editor of the Lewiston Sun Journal about old swimming holes now gone, including the impoundments behind older mill dams like the Barker Mill Dam on the Little Androscoggin River.

Add another high-profile place to the list of large businesses adding solar power: Patriot Place, the shopping mall adjoining the New England Patriots' Gillette Stadium, has installed a 525 kW solar array.  They turned to Constellation Energy for the installation, but the solar photovoltaic panels themselves were manufactured by Evergreen Solar of Massachusetts.

Wind turbine prices are flat, averaging about $1.37 million per megawatt of capacity according to a survey by Bloomberg New Energy Finance.  (Note that this is just the turbine price; towers, transmission and installation are all in addition to the turbine price.)  Turbine pricing is down about 15% from its peak in 2008, likely due to a mix of factors including new technology and increased production capacity, but also some decreased demand compared to the initial fervor.

Meanwhile, people continue to solve the problem of how to integrate wind into the grid.  Energy storage is one major approach.  Xcel Energy has issued a report on its experiments with massive 1 megawatt batteries to smooth out voltage and current from wind farms.  Xcel's project in Minnesota is promoted as America's first direct wind-energy-storage project.

July 21, 2010 - balancing wind into the grid; underperforming community wind turbine; China's Three Gorges Dam flooding

License plate seen in Maine:

From Energy Policy Update

How much wind can we really integrate into today's power grid? An interesting article in the Oregonian highlights the challenges. Take, for example, what happened on May 19, when the wind shifted and Bonneville Power Authority grid operators had to make room on the wires for 1000 turbines' worth of wind (nearly 2000 MW). This is a lot of power: more power than the BPA control area needs, more than the amount of hydro production that could be ramped down, and more than BPA could export to neighboring control areas. So what did BPA do? It told wind generators to feather their blades and cut their production -- a less than ideal solution.

In a parallel scenario, Venezuela is undergoing rolling blackouts. Venezuela relies on hydroelectricity for 70% of its power, and a long-lasting drought has crippled power production. Critics also point to chronic mismanagement and underinvestment by the nationalized companies that operate the power grid.

The City of Saco, Maine, is in a bit of a pickle over its community wind project. Back in 2007, Saco bought the turbine and tower for $207,000 from Entegrity Wind Systems. (As mentioned in an earlier blog post, Kittery also bought a turbine from Entegrity. It did better than Saco's, but Kittery's turbine underperformed as well.) At the time, community-scale wind was all the rage. The Maine Legislature had directed the Maine Public Utilities Commission to organize a stakeholder process to evaluate the state's opportunities for community wind. Although this process ultimately resulted in a report concluding that community wind was not generally economic under current conditions, many people and communities decided to pursue small- and medium-scale renewable project for their civic, educational and environmental values.

When Saco bought the turbine, Entegrity told Saco that the unit would generate 90,000 kilowatt-hours annually (about $12,600 worth of electricity) for 10 years. The unit came online in February 2008. It never performed as well as Entegrity had represented. At some point, former Entegrity head James Heath offered to buy the turbine back for $130,000. Then the turbine broke. In the meantime, Entegrity Wind Systems went bankrupt. The City was left holding the underperforming turbine.

Now, the Saco City Council is considering its options. Repair the turbine? Sell the turbine? Negotiate with James Heath? Litigation?



In other news: China's Three Gorges Dam is facing record flooding, comparable to the 1988 floods that killed over 4000 people. The dam had been touted as offering protection against floods. So far the dam is holding, but the massive reservoir is within 20 meters of full. More water is on its way.

A new report by the Maine State Chamber of Commerce and the Maine Development Foundation suggests that Maine businesses' most critical challenges come from health insurance costs, energy, taxes, regulations and transportation, in that order. A Lewiston Sun Journal editorial calls for an end to "destructive regulatory practices" that drive money, businesses and people out of Maine.

WCSH 6 reports on the plans of Ocean Energy Institute founder Matt Simmons to transform Maine into the "Silicon Valley of ocean energy". The Ocean Energy Institute has previously expressed interest in exploring links between offshore wind and ammonia production for energy storage.