Hydrokinetic energy projects in 2014

Hydrokinetic energy projects generate electricity from moving water, capturing the power embodied in tides, waves, and currents without the use of dams.  Hydrokinetic energy resources are estimated to have a tremendous power potential -- according to one U.S. Department of Energy study, approximately 1,420 terawatt-hours per year, or approximately one-third of the nation's total annual electricity usage.  The technologies required are relatively new, do not have decades of operational experience, and remain relatively expensive.  Nevertheless, federal records show growth in hydrokinetic project development.

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission regulates most hydrokinetic energy projects under its hydropower jurisdiction pursuant to the Federal Power Act.  Project developers may seek preliminary permits granting the right to study a particular site and priority to apply for a project license. 

Relatively few projects have received licenses to date.  In 2012, the Commission issued a pilot project license for the Roosevelt Island Tidal Energy project in the East River near New York City.  Last month, the Commission issued a pilot project license to the Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County for a 600 kilowatt tidal project in Puget Sound, Washington.

As of last month, six projects have been issued preliminary permits that remain in effect:

• Ecosponsible, Inc.'s Niagara Community project, a 1.25 megawatt inland project proposed for the Niagara River in New York
• Ecosponsible, Inc.'s Niagara Community #2 project, a similar 1.25 megawatt inland project proposed for the Niagara River in New York
• Iguigig Village Council's Iguigig RISEC project, a 40 kilowatt inland project proposed for the Kvichak River in Alaska
• The Town of Edgartown, Massachusetts's Muskeget Channel Tidal Energy project, a 4.94 megawatt project proposed for the Muskeget Channel off the island of Martha's Vineyard
• Turnagain Arm Tidal Energy's Turnagain Arm Tidal project, a 240 megawatt tidal project proposed for Cook Inlet, Alaska
• Resolute Marine Energy, Inc.'s Yakutat project, a 750 kilowatt wave project proposed in the Gulf of Alaska

 As of March, another 15 applications for preliminary permits were pending before the Commission.

EPA issues draft permits for carbon sequestration

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has issued the first draft permits for injecting and storing carbon dioxide in underground rock formations, which could advance carbon capture and sequestration efforts.

EPA promotes carbon capture and sequestration for its expected ability to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, while enabling low-carbon electricity generation from power plants.  The process entails capturing and compressing carbon emissions at their source, piping the gas to injection wells, and injecting the gas into geologically stable rock formations capable of holding the gas for long periods of time.

EPA's simplified schematic of deep geologic carbon sequestration, available from EPA at http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/ccs/.

Under the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, EPA regulates most injections of waste and other materials into the ground.  EPA has developed a series of programs to manage such injections, including a "Class VI" geologic sequestration program.  While oil producers have long injected carbon dioxide into their wells to enhance oil recovery, EPA has not previously issued any permits under its Class VI program.  This lack of Class VI activity is largely because carbon capture and sequestration in the U.S. remains in its infancy, but some industry observers have expressed concerns that EPA's regulatory process is too restrictive to allow the technology to flourish.  The record of permit applications shows some support for these concerns: for example, Christian County Generation, LLC of Taylorville, IL withdrew its applications for two Class VI sequestration wells for the Taylorville Energy Center on July 9, 2013, and Archer Daniels Midland's applications for Class VI permits for two injection wells to store carbon emissions from its Decatur, Illinois agricultural products and biofuel production facility have remained pending since 2011.

Carbon capture and sequestration's future may be brightening, as on March 31, 2014, EPA issued four draft Class VI permits to FutureGen Industrial Alliance, Inc. for its proposed FutureGen 2.0 project.  The Alliance is a non-profit organization whose membership includes major coal producers, coal users, and coal equipment suppliers, including Alpha Natural Resources, AngloAmerican, JoyGlobal Inc., Peabody Energy, and Xstrata Coal Pty. Limited.  The FutureGen 2.0 project is designed to capture over 90 percent of the carbon emissions from a 168 megawatt power plant in Meredosia, Illinois, and to inject them into four nearby wells for deep geologic sequestration.

EPA's draft permits now face a public hearing on May 7 and public comments through May 15.

Smart meters are safe, says Maine agency staff

The staff of the Maine Public Utilities Commission has issued a report concluding that the use of "smart meters" -- advanced utility metering infrastructure capable of communicating wirelessly with the utility -- is a "safe, reasonable, and adequate utility service."

Smart meters and other new utility technologies offer the opportunity to cut ratepayer costs while enabling new and innovative services.  Building on the ubiquity of cell phones, the internet, and other devices that can communicate using radio frequency emissions, smart meters can provide utilities with real-time data on each customer's consumption of electricity.  This can eliminate the need for traditional meter readers, enable utilities to manage outages in real-time, and can open up opportunities for real-time pricing of electricity.  Many utilities have adopted smart meters and other so-called "advanced metering infrastructure", including Maine's largest electric utility Central Maine Power Co.

But some people are concerned about the safety of smart meters, and in particular with the health effects of the radio frequency emissions associated with the meters' communication system.  Utilities around the country have faced questions, and even legal challenges, over the safety of smart meters.  As CMP rolled out its smart meter program, the Maine Public Utilities Commission received a series of complaints and requests for investigation into whether CMP's advanced metering infrastructure program complied with Maine law requiring utilities to provide safe, reasonable, and adequate utility service.

After legal proceedings before the Commission and Maine's highest state court, in 2012, the Commission opened an investigation into "the health and safety issue related to CMP's installation of smart meter technology."  That investigation led to Tuesday's release of a Commission staff report (67-page PDF) summarizing the evidence it had collected and staff's conclusions.  Highlights from the report include the following findings:

• The radio frequency (RF) emissions from CMP' s smart meters and other AMI components comply with duly promulgated federal safety regulations and other RF emission standards;
• No state, federal, or Canadian regulatory body or health agency that has considered the health impacts of smart meters (including Maine 's Center for Disease Control and Prevention (Maine CDC)) has found smart meters to be unsafe;
• The scientific evidence presented in this proceeding is inconclusive with respect to the human health impacts from low-level RF emissions generally;
• There are no credible, peer-reviewed scientific studies in the record that demonstrate, or even purport to demonstrate, a direct human health risk specifically from smart meter RF emissions;
• The studies that have been presented in the record to demonstrate the risk to human health from exposure to RF-emitting devices are based on exposure to substantially higher levels of RF emissions than smart meters;
• The relative RF emission exposure from smart meters is significantly less than other commonly used RF-emitting electronic devices; and
• CMP' s installation and operation of its smart meter system is consistent with federal and state energy policy and is a generally accepted utility practice throughout the country.

Based on these findings, the staff report concludes that "CMP's installation and operation of its smart meter system is consistent with its statutory obligation to furnish safe, reasonable and adequate facilities and service."  That said, the report also concurs with recommendations that continued research should be done on the impacts on human health from radio frequency emissions.

It now falls to the full Commission to take up the issue.  Will the Commissioners agree with their staff's findings and conclusion?

Biofuels lead growth in U.S. biomass energy

The use of energy from biomass resources in the United States grew more than 60% over the decade between 2002 and 2013 -- primarily in the form of increased use of biofuels like ethanol and biodiesel that are produced from biomass.


A fuel pump displays prices for gasoline blended with up to 10% ethanol.

According to the U.S. Energy Information Administration, biomass accounted for about half of all renewable energy consumed in 2013 and 5% of total U.S. energy consumed. The three primary sources of this biomass are wood and forest products byproducts, waste including municipal solid waste and landfill gas, and raw organic feedstocks like corn and soybean oil used to produce biofuels.

Of biomass energy resources, biofuels experienced the greatest growth over the last decade. From 2002 to 2013, biofuels created from biomass grew more than 500%, driven largely by increases in U.S. production of ethanol and biodiesel for blending as transportation fuels. These biofuels are typically produced from feedstocks such as agricultural crops and other plant material, animal byproducts, and recycled waste. For U.S. ethanol production, corn is the dominant feedstock, while biodiesel producers rely on soybean oil for just over half of feedstock needs and an array of biomass resources for the rest. Market demand for these biofuels comes in part from federal mandates such as the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Renewable Fuel Standard, which requires the blending of certain volumes of biofuels into gasoline and diesel.

Meanwhile, EIA data shows that consumption of wood and waste energy increased just 4% over the decade. About two-thirds of U.S. wood energy is consumed for industrial processes, while nearly all U.S. waste energy is consumed for electric generation or industrial processes.

If this trend continues, woody biomass and waste energy will continue to hold their positions in our portfolio of energy resources, while continued growth in the conversion of biomass into biofuels for transportation and other needs will increase biofuels' weighting in the nation's energy mix.  At the same time, debates continue over the cost and value of programs encouraging the growth of corn as a biofuel feedstock.  What does the future hold for biomass in the U.S.?

Snohomish tidal project wins FERC pilot license

Federal regulators have issued a pilot license for a proposed tidal energy project in Washington.

Tidal waters off the Maine coast.

Yesterday, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission issued a 10-year pilot license to Public Utility District No. 1 of Snohomish County for the proposed Admiralty Inlet Pilot Tidal Project.  The 600-kilowatt hydrokinetic project, to be located in Puget Sound in the state of Washington, is designed as a temporary, experimental project to evaluate the commercial viability of tidal energy development in Puget Sound.

According to the Commission's Order Issuing Pilot Project License (85-page PDF), the proposed project features two tidal turbines to be manufactured by OpenHydro, each measuring 6 meters in diameter, secured to the seabed by the turbines' 414-ton weight.  Peak tidal currents at the site exceed 3 meters per second.  The Public Utility District plans to connect the project to the mainland grid via subsea cables connecting to District-leased land south of the Coupeville Ferry Terminal.

In granting the pilot license, the Commission considered a range of possible resource impacts from the project.  The site lies near key shipping lanes to the ports of Seattle, Tacoma, Olympia, and Everett, and is near a key trans-oceanic fiber optic cable connecting North America to Japan.  To address concerns over impacts to these resources, the Commission imposed conditions and monitoring requirements on the project.

The Commission's pilot licensure program differs somewhat from its general licensing of hydropower projects.  As described in a whitepaper on the pilot project licensing process prepared by Commission staff, pilot projects should be (1) small; (2) short term; (3) located in non-sensitive areas based on the Commission’s review of the record; (4) removable and able to be shut down on short notice; (5) removed, with the site restored, before the end of the license term (unless a new license is granted); and (6) initiated by a draft application in a form sufficient to support environmental analysis. Projects meeting these criteria enjoy a streamlined regulatory review process.

With the pilot license in hand, the Public Utility District may prepare for project development.  But if the project goes forward, the District may have to justify its costs.  As noted in the Commission’s order, the project has relatively high capital, operation, and maintenance costs with respect to the amount of power produced.  According to the Commission’s order, the levelized annual cost of operating the project will be about $1,848,294, or $7,574.98 per megawatt-hour of energy generated -- significantly higher than the estimated $30/MWh cost of alternative power.  Based on an estimated average annual generation of 244,000 kilowatt-hours as licensed, Commission staff projects that in the first year of operation, the project power will cost $1,840,974 more than the cost of alternative power.

Admittedly, the Snohomish project is designed as an experiment -- a pilot project to test technology and project feasibility.  The Snohomish project is among the first hydrokinetic projects in the country to receive a FERC license.  The first pilot project issued for a tidal project, the Roosevelt Island Tidal Energy Project, similarly faces projected above-market energy costs.  Like the Roosevelt Island project, the Snohomish project will be relatively small.  But given its financial picture, will the Snohomish project go forward?

NJ regulators reject offshore wind project

The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities has voted against extending ratepayer subsidies to an offshore wind project proposed by developer Fishermen's Energy, challenging the project's financial viability.

The New Jersey coast near Atlantic City, seen from above.

Back in 2011, Fishermen's Energy proposed a 25-megawatt offshore wind pilot project to be located off Atlantic City.  The developer applied to the Board of Public Utilities for ratepayer support under New Jersey's Offshore Wind Economic Development Act of 2010.  That law directed the Board of Public Utilities to develop a program to require utilities to source a percentage of the electricity they sell in New Jersey from one or more qualified offshore wind projects.  To track energy from offshore wind, the law envisioned the creation of offshore renewable energy certificates, or ORECs, that could be sold by qualified offshore wind projects to the load-serving utilities.  The concept was that given the relatively high costs and uncertainty of offshore wind, no project could be financed or built without a steady revenue stream from OREC sales.

But the New Jersey project appeared to stall before the Board.  Charged with creating the OREC program and evaluating whether the Fishermen's Energy project could qualify to produce ORECs, the Board was faced with serious technical tasks.  As the regulatory process for the Fishermen's Energy project lengthened -- ultimately stretching to over 1,000 days -- Board staff raised concerns over the financial viability of the project, as well as over the impact of the requested subsidy to ratepayer costs.  Despite trimming the project's estimated costs to $188 million, these concerns remained, leading Board staff to recommend denial of Fishermen's Energy's request for OREC certification.
  
Yesterday, the Board of Public Utilities rejected Fishermen’s Energy’s proposal by a unanimous 4-0 decision.  While the Board's formal written order has not yet been released, expect it to explain the Board's reasoning in more detail when it surfaces next week.  In the meantime, Fishermen’s Energy is undoubtedly considering its options, which may include dropping the project, appealing the Board's rejection, or finding alternative ways to de-risk and finance the project.

NJ board to decide on offshore wind project

Will New Jersey regulators approve key support for an offshore wind project proposed off the Jersey shore?

Many coastal states and nations are placing new focus on energy projects designed to generate electricity from offshore winds.  A project off New Jersey, first proposed in 2011, appeared to make some initial progress, but has since seemed to stall -- due in part to regulatory delays at the state level.  With a decision by the state Board of Public Utilities (BPU) expected this week, will the Fishermen's Energy offshore wind project move forward?

Fishing boats in a small harbor along Maine's midcoast.

The New Jersey coast offers a fairly unique combination of wind resources and proximity to customer demand.  To capitalize on this combination, the New Jersey legislature and government adopted measures promoting the development of the state's offshore wind resource.  For example, New Jersey's Energy Master Plan calls for an ambitious target of 1,100 megawatts of offshore wind installed by 2020.

In response to the opportunity, in May 2011,  Fisherman's Energy submitted an application to the BPU under the Offshore Wind Economic Development Act for an offshore wind demonstration project.  The Cape May, New Jersey-based developer proposed five, five-megawatt wind turbines in state waters about 2.8 miles off the Atlantic City coast, with a total capacity of 25 megawatts and an estimated cost of $200 million to $300 million.  By the end of 2012, the project had won substantially all of the permits necessary for its development and operation, including approvals by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection and Army Corps of Engineers -- but a key piece of the regulatory and financing puzzles remains missing.

Under New Jersey law, the BPU may select one or more qualified offshore wind  projects for financial support in the form of a long-term contract to buy Offshore Wind Renewable Energy Certificates, or ORECs, from the developer.  This revenue stream is viewed as essential to enable a developer to finance and construct a project.

But nearly 3 years later, the state OREC review process remains ongoing. Last year, BPU Staff recommended the BPU reject Fishermen’s project on the grounds that it demonstrated no economic benefits but bore unnecessary technology risk due to its selection of XEMC turbines.  But project advocates, including the New Jersey Rate Counsel, support the project for its apparent consumer benefits.  Nevertheless, the BPU has yet to approve an OREC program.

Meanwhile, crucial federal tax incentives such as the renewable energy business investment tax credit have ended.  Many renewable project developers have found these credits essential in building financing packages for their projects over the last years; while the credits may be reenacted in some form, their loss may mean Fishermen's Energy needs to revise its financial projections.

Fishermen's Energy -- and the many other stakeholders following the project -- may soon learn the project's fate.  The New Jersey BPU is scheduled to vote today on whether to approve the project and authorize it to produce and sell ORECs.  Will the BPU grant Fishermen's Energy's request?