Canada's Supreme Court rules for Quebec utility over energy contract

Canada's highest court has ruled that Quebec's provincial utility Hydro-Quebec cannot be required to renegotiate a long-term contract to buy power from a Labrador hydroelectric plant at below-market rates, even though the deal has yielded about 14 times more profit for Hydro-Quebec than for the Labrador generator.

At issue is the Churchill Falls hydroelectric plant on the upper Churchill River in Labrador, and a 1969 agreement between Hydro-Quebec and Churchill Falls (Labrador) Corporation Limited -- a company jointly owned by Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro and Hydro-Quebec. The Churchill Falls plant can generate 5,428 megawatts of power, and is one of the world's largest hydroelectric power stations.

According to former Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador Brian Tobin, during pre-construction negotiations, Hydro-Quebec told Churchill Falls that it would not allow the Labrador generator to "wheel" project power through the Hydro-Quebec grid, nor to build its own power line through Quebec to reach U.S. markets. As a result, under the terms of the 1969 agreement, Hydro-Quebec agreed to buy most of the project's power at the fixed price of $2.50 per megawatt-hour, to guarantee construction cost overruns, and to build transmission lines connecting the generators to markets, enabling the Labrador generator to sell power and to use debt financing to construct the plant. The original contract was set to expire in 2016, but included a renewal clause allowing Hydro-Quebec to extend the contract for an additional 25 years at a fixed price of $2 per megawatt-hour through 2041.

After the contract was signed, changes in the electricity market -- including oil price shocks in the 1970s, a decline in public confidence in nuclear power after a 1979 accident, and the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's 1996 decision to require open access to transmission systems -- meant the contract's purchase price is now well below market prices. Because Hydro-Quebec sells electricity from the plant to third parties at market prices, Hydro-Quebec reaps substantial profits from the deal. For example, Hydro-Quebec reports that the average retail price for residential customers in St. John's, Newfoundland in 2018 is $120.30 per megawatt-hour. Canada's National Energy Board says the 2017 average wholesale prices for electricity imports were over $24 per megawatt-hour, with exports priced even higher at $38.58 per megawatt-hour -- over 19 times higher than the price Hydro-Quebec now pays Churchill Falls during the extended contract term. According to CBC, the contract has yielded about $28 billion in profits to Quebec, but just $2 billion for Newfoundland and Labrador.

Citing legal theories including a general duty of good faith, Nalcor Energy subsidiary Churchill Falls asked Canadian courts to order that the contract be renegotiated and the benefits be reallocated. After lower courts sided with Hydro-Quebec, the generator appealed to the Supreme Court of Canada.

On November 2, the Supreme Court of Canada rendered its judgment in the matter of Churchill Falls (Labrador) v. Hydro-Quebec. The high court found, by a 7 to 1 decision, for Hydro-Quebec, noting that the parties "bound themselves knowing full well what they were doing" and that Hydro-Quebec could insist on adhering to the contract despite the "unforeseen" increase in the power's market value.

The one dissenting judge characterized the contract as "relational" in nature, and thus said that both parties are subject to a duty of cooperation which Hydro-Quebec breached by failing to renegotiate and to more fully share the benefits of higher-than-expected market prices. He said that because "a profit imbalance of this nature and magnitude is beyond what the parties intended when they concluded the agreement", the parties had an implied obligation to cooperate in establishing a mechanism for the allocation of "extraordinary profits."

Maine biomass commission to meet

A commission charged by the Maine legislature to study the state's biomass energy industry will hold its first meeting next month.  The study committee's work will result in a report to the legislature, and could include recommended changes to state law.

The Maine State House.

At the end of its 2016 session, the Maine legislature enacted a resolve establishing the Commission to Study the Economic, Environmental and Energy Benefits of the Maine Biomass Industry.  The resolve directed the commission to:

1. Review and evaluate the economic, environmental and energy benefits of Maine's biomass resources, as well as public policy and economic proposals to create and maintain a sustainable future for the Maine biomass industry;
2. Consider the interconnection of economic markets for biomass and forest products and the energy policy of the State;
3. Consider whether the environmental, economic and energy benefits of biomass support updating the State's energy policy to strengthen and increase the role that biomass and the forest products industry play throughout the State;
4. Consider the costs of implementing any recommendations and the effect of leaving current policies in place; and
5. Examine any other issues to further the purposes of the study. 

The Maine biomass commission has now been formed, and has scheduled its first meeting for August 2, 2016.  As prescribed by the resolve, its membership includes a mix of legislators and others interested in the state's biomass energy policy.

The resolve directed the biomass study commission to submit a report and any suggested implementing legislation for committee consideration by December 6, 2016.

Biomass was a hot topic in the past legislative session.  On a separate track, this spring the Maine legislature enacted a law establishing a long-term contracting program for biomass-fueled power plants.  The Maine Public Utilities Commission has issued a request for proposals under that program, with contract proposals due on or before July 29, 2016.

Maine biomass resource RFP issued

The Maine Public Utilities Commission has issued an order approving a Request for Proposals for biomass energy resources.  At stake are two-year contracts through which biomass resources may sell energy and related products to Maine transmission and distribution utilities.

Earlier this year, the Maine legislature enacted An Act to Establish a Process for the Procurement of Biomass Resources.  Originally proposed as LD 1676 and enacted as Public Law 2015, Chapter 483, that law requires the Public Utilities Commission to initiate a competitive solicitation for 2-year contracts for up to 80 megawatts of biomass resources. 

By order dated June 17, 2016, the Commission approved a Request for Proposals pursuant to its authority under the Act.  The RFP document -- formally styled a Request for Proposals for the Sale of Energy from Biomass Resources -- was released at the same time. It asks for proposals from Biomass Resources for the sale of energy under one or more two-year contracts; bidders may also offer to sell capacity and/or renewable energy attributes as part of the contract.

The RFP defines a Biomass Resource as "a source of electrical generation fueled by wood, wood waste or landfill gas that produces energy delivered to the ISO-NE or NMISA region."  Additional requirements and criteria apply, including minimum capacity factor thresholds and preferences for creating in-state benefits.  It is possible that no contracts will be awarded, or that there won't be money to pay under those contracts.  If the Commission concludes that this solicitation is not competitive, based either on the solicitation process or the resulting bids, no bidders may be selected.  By law, payments are also contingent on the availability of funding for any above-market portion of the contracts, from a Cost Recovery Fund established by the Act.

Contract proposals are due on or before July 29, 2016. According to the Commission's materials, the RFP and all related documents and information will be available on the Commission's RFP website.

Maine biomass procurement competitive standards

As the Maine Public Utilities Commission prepares for its upcoming procurement of biomass power resources, the Commission has requested public comment on the standards and criteria to be used in evaluating whether the solicitation is "not competitive."

This spring, the Maine State Legislature enacted An Act To Establish a Process for the Procurement of Biomass Resources.  The law directs the Maine Public Utilities Commission to initiate a competitive solicitation as soon as practicable, seeking proposals for 2-year contracts for up to 80 megawatts of biomass resources.  

But largely due to fairness and cost-containment concerns, the legislature created a "safety valve" in case the solicitation turns out to be "not competitive."  The Act specifies that “If the commission concludes that the solicitation ... is not competitive, no bidders may be selected and the commission is not obligated to enter into a contract.”

On May 17, 2016, the Commission issued a request for comment in its Procurement of Biomass Resources docket.  That request describes the Commission's plans to initiate the procurement process "in the near future" through the issuance of a request for proposals or RFP.  But before issuing the RFP, the Commission has requested comment on the standards and criteria to be used to determine whether the solicitation is “not competitive” pursuant to the Act.

Comments are requested by May 30, 2016.

Maine solar legislation released

The Maine legislature has printed a bill whose enactment would reshape the state's solar energy laws.  The bill, An Act To Modernize Maine's Solar Power Policy and Encourage Economic Development, has been numbered as LD 1649.  It would replace a billing treatment called net metering with a series of long-term contracts and utility procurement orders.

Solar photovoltaic panels on the roof of Gallagher's Auto Parts, in Patten, Maine.

Under net metering or “net energy billing,” an electric utility invoices a customer with solar panels based on the difference between the customer's energy use and the solar project's output.  If the generator output exceeds monthly usage in any billing period, the customer earns kilowatt-hour credits that can be banked and netted against future usage.  The bipartisan non-governmental organization National Conference of State Legislatures has noted that "Net metering policies have facilitated the expansion of renewable energy through on-site generation, also known as distributed generation."

But a 2015 Maine legislative resolve directed the Public Utilities Commission to convene a stakeholder group to consider alternatives to net energy billing, largely in the hopes of helping more consumers connect with solar power.  As part of that case, the state's Office of Public Advocate proposed a structure where individual solar projects would enter into contracts to sell solar power to their local utility.  While stakeholders developed consensus around exploring the concept, there was not uniform agreement around whether it should immediately replace net metering, or whether the new concept should operate "side by side" with net metering for some test period.

The bill now printed as LD 1649 largely reflects the contract-based, solar standard buyer proposal.  It would direct the Public Utilities Commission to enter into twenty-year contracts for the procurement of 248 megawatts of solar energy between 2017 and 2022.  The bill allocates 60 megawatts (24%) to grid-scale solar distributed generation resources; 45 megawatts (19%) to large-scale community solar resources; 25 megawatts (10%) to commercial and industrial resources; and 118 (47%) megawatts to residential and small business resources.  This would represent a significant expansion of solar capacity in Maine compared to what has been developed to date.

Under LD 1649, customers could seek contracts to sell solar power to a standard buyer (the utility) at prices set by the Public Utilities Commission. The standard buyer's stated role is to purchase the output of these distributed generation resources, aggregate the portfolio of resources procured, and sell it into the relevant New England markets. 

Consumers with projects up to 250 kilowatts in capacity could have two options.  The first is to sell the project's entire output to the utility under a contract, and buy all the customer's electricity requirements back from the utility in a separate transaction.  This is sometimes described as a "buy-all, sell-all" structure.

The second option is to use onsite generation to first offset electric consumption, and sell any excess electricity.  This would allow hourly offsetting of onsite load, but would not allow customers to carry forward monthly credits for excess production that could be used to offset future load.  This differs from net metering under Maine's current regulations, which measure net energy use over an entire month billing period, and carry credits forward for up to 12 billing months.

This contracting structure would effectively replace net metering. No new customers could participate in net metering once the new rules take effect.  Those residential and small business customers who already net meter their loads against a distributed solar project would face a choice: either seek a long-term contract under the new program, or elect to net meter for 12 more years.    

The bill would also largely eliminate Maine's policy of virtual net metering, which has allowed customers to net meter load at one site against a solar project located elsewhere in the same utility's service territory.

As of late on March 9, LD 1649, An Act To Modernize Maine's Solar Power Policy and Encourage Economic Development, had not yet been referred to committee, nor a public hearing scheduled.

Maine community renewable energy project winds down

Maine energy regulators will soon act on proposals for community-based renewable energy projects, as legal authority for a community energy pilot program winds down.

In 2009, the Maine Legislature enacted An Act To Establish the Community-based Renewable Energy Pilot Program, P.L. 2009, ch. 329.  The Act established a pilot program to provide incentives for the development of community-based renewable projects.  To qualify, projects must be “locally owned electricity generating facilities” (51% or more of the facility must be owned by “qualifying local owners”) and must not exceed 10 MW.  The Maine Public Utilities Commission was charged with administering the program, including certifying qualifying facilities.  To a community renewable energy project developer, the program offered the opportunity to win a long-term contract to sell project power to a Maine utility at predictable prices.

A 2015 law amended the community-based renewable energy program.  Among other changes, it required the Commission to perform a "viability assessment" of all projects that have been certified under the program but have not yet reached commercial operations.  For any projects the Commission determines will not be viable by December 31, 2018, the Act states that the Commission must revoke any contract awarded, though the projects will remain certified.  In September 2015, the Commission completed its viability assessment and identified approximately 21 megawatts of capacity that is available for contract awards. 

The 2015 law effectively provides that the Commission's authority to order utilities to enter into community-based renewable energy projects expires on December 31, 2015.   In light of the 21 megawatts of program capacity identified as available, on September 30, the Commission issued a request for proposals for projects seeking the remaining contract awards.

Proposals were due by November 6, 2015. According to the RFP,  the Commission will complete its evaluation of proposals and accept or reject proposals no later than December 31.

Maine long-term contracting for electricity

Maine energy regulators have asked for public comment on the goals and objectives for a decade-old program supporting long-term contracts between utilities and independent power producers.  At stake is the future of Maine's long-term contracting program for electricity resources.

In 2006, the Maine State Legislature enacted an Act to Enhance Maine’s Energy Independence and Security, P.L. 2005, ch. 677.  Part C of that Act (codified at 35-A M.R.S. § 3210-C) authorizes the Maine Public Utilities Commission to direct transmission and distribution utilities to enter into long-term contracts for capacity and energy.  The statute directs the Commission to conduct a competitive solicitation for contracts at least every three years, and specifies the framework that the Commission must use in selectingcapacity resources for contracting, including a stated priority list of types of resources and a duty to select lowest price offers.

Since the Act's enactment, the Commission has conducted five solicitations under this program (including the current solicitation, under which proposals are due by May 1, 2015).  In each case, the Commission has hired an outside consultant to forecast relevant markets for energy, capacity, and renewable energy credits to be used in evaluating the value of the market products offered in responsive bids.

Today, the Commission issued a Notice of Inquiry into the goals and objectives for long-term contracting under the Act.  In the notice, the Commission asks for public comment on how long-term contracts can most effectively be used to support the development of increased generation from renewable resources, and reduce price volatility and greenhouse gas emissions; how the Commission should evaluate proposals' price reduction benefits; and how to best structure transactions.

The Commission also asked for comment on relatively novel potential uses of the program, including leveraging federal support for energy programs to benefit Maine ratepayers, increasing in-state generation capacity such that Maine would “separate” from the rest of New England in the regional forward capacity market to yield reduced in-state prices for capacity, and "geo-targeting" capacity resources to avoid transmission and distribution costs more effectively.

Finally, the Commission requested feedback on its long-term contracting process.  Should the Commission issue requests for proposal on a set schedule (e.g. every two years), or should it retain discretion as to when to issue an RFP?  Should the process include fixed dates for key milestones like submission of final bids or Commission decisions, or should it remain flexible and unfixed?

Comments are due to the Maine Public Utilities Commission by May 6, 2015.

Topaz Solar becomes largest solar power project

A recent expansion has made a California solar energy project the world’s largest solar facility. Built in three phases, MidAmerican Renewables LLC’s Topaz Solar project in San Luis Obispo County now sports 550 MW total generating capacity.

A small distributed solar photovoltaic installation in Arches National Park, Utah -- much smaller than the Topaz Solar project.

Iowa-based MidAmerican Renewables LLC is a subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway Energy formed to handle its expansion into the unregulated renewables market.  Its subsidiaries MidAmerican Solar, MidAmerican Wind, MidAmerican Geothermal and MidAmerican Hydro each focus on particular types of renewable energy generating technology.  In all, MidAmerican controls over 3,000 MW of renewable generating capacity in the U.S.

MidAmerican acquired the Topaz Solar project from First Solar in January 2012, after First Solar had acquired previous project developer OptiSolar, Inc.  Project construction began in November 2011, and proceeded in three phases.  Earlier phases came online in February 2013 and in January 2014, for a total of 300 MW of capacity.  With the recent expansion, the 550-megawatt project includes over 8 million photovoltaic modules, installed on 4,700 acres of the Carrizo Plain in the southern California desert.

The power produced by the project is sold to utility Pacific Gas and Electric Company under a 25-year power purchase agreement.  Topaz Solar won the long-term contract rights through its response to a 2007 solicitation by PG&E for renewable power.

According to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the Topaz Solar project is now the world's largest solar energy plant.

Atlantic offshore wind energy targeted

A report released by the National Wildlife Foundation highlights the potential of U.S. states on the Atlantic Ocean to generate electricity from offshore wind -- and calls upon state leaders to take action to promote offshore wind development.

The 24-page report, Catching the Wind: State Actions Needed to Seize the Golden Opportunity of U.S. Offshore Wind Power, describes responsibly developed offshore wind as "a golden opportunity to meet our coastal energy needs with a clean, local resource that will spur investments in local economies."  In particular, the Atlantic coast offers a high-quality wind resource in close proximity to power-thirsty coastal cities.

Key findings in the report include:

• Offshore winds off New England and New York blow consistently during periods of high electric demand, including summer heat waves and winter cold snaps.
• Federal environmental reviews are complete for over 1.5 million acres of Atlantic sea space, with over 16,000 megawatts of potential wind capacity.
• Diversifying states' energy mix with offshore wind can reduce prices and offset volatility, citing a 2014 study showing New England would save $350 million per year in reduced energy costs, or 2%, if 1,200 megawatts of offshore wind is added.
• Offshore wind reduces air pollution, including carbon emissions.
• Offshore wind development creates jobs, and can be done in an environmentally responsible manner.

The report highlights Massachusetts and Rhode Island as leading America's pursuit of offshore wind, followed by Maryland, Virginia, New York, New Jersey, and Delaware, with Maine, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia bringing up the rear.  New Hampshire, Connecticut, and Florida are noted as "states to watch" with no offshore wind planning activities.

The report calls on state leaders to:

• Set a bold goal for offshore wind in the state's energy plan.
• Take action to ensure a competitive market for offshore wind power.
• Advance power contracts for offshore wind.
• Ensure an efficient, transparent, and environmentally responsible offshore wind leasing process that protects wildlife.
• Invest in key research, initiatives, and infrastructure needed to spur offshore wind development.

Will Atlantic states develop their offshore wind resources?