DOCSLIB.ORG

2004 State of the Markets Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2004 State of the Markets Report Cover Image Credited to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA/DMSP) NOAA image of cloud-free composite of USA night lights taken from Oct. 1, 1994, to March 31, 1995. NOAA processed the data taken by the Defense Meteorological Defense Program. http://www.noaa.gov 2004 STATE OF THE MARKETS REPORT An Assessment of Energy Markets in the United States in 2004 A Staff Report by the Office of Market Oversight and Investigations Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Published June 2005 • Docket MO05-4-000 State of the Markets Report • June 2005 1 State of the Markets Report PREFACE This is the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s third State of the Markets Report. Produced by the Commission’s Office of Market Oversight and Investigations (OMOI), the report covers electric, natural gas, and other related energy market activity during 2004. In contrast to seasonal assessments, which focus on the near future, this report examines performance in the recent past. The State of the Markets Report presents findings regarding market conditions relevant to the Commission and identifies emerging trends that may soon require the Commission’s attention. The Commission created OMOI in April 2002 to focus its efforts on energy market oversight. Any errors in this report are the responsibility of OMOI alone and not of the Commission as a whole. I want to commend the efforts of OMOI staff for this project. Major contributors to this team effort are listed in the Acknowledgments. A fair energy market is everyone’s responsibility. Please do your part. If you encounter inappropriate energy market behavior, contact our Enforcement Hotline toll-free by telephone at 1-888-889-8030 or via e-mail at [email protected]. Thank you, William F. Hederman Director Office of Market Oversight and Investigations We encourage readers to provide feedback on this report by OMOI (State of the Markets Report) filling out the State of the Markets Report Evaluation Card FERC at the end of the report, sending comments in an e-mail to 888 First Street, N.E. [email protected], or by contacting staff referenced in the Washington, D.C. 20426 acknowledgments by mail or phone. 202-502-8100 2 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission • Office of Market Oversight and Investigations State of the Markets Report TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary 5 2004 Issues in Energy Markets Markets Under Stress: New England Reacts to Record Cold 13 Electric Market Investment and Merger Trends 25 Energy Market Information 35 Market Behavior Rules: Effectiveness Review 45 Electric Power Market Profiles National Overview 49 California (CAISO) 69 Midwest (MISO) 77 New England (ISO–NE) 83 New York (NYISO) 91 Northwest 99 PJM 105 Southeast 115 Southwest 121 Southwest Power Pool (SPP) 127 Texas (ERCOT) 131 Natural Gas Market Profiles National Overview 137 Natural Gas Trading 151 Midwest 157 Northeast 165 South Central 175 Southeast 185 Western 193 Other Related Markets and Market Factors Overview 203 Coal 205 Demand Response 211 Emission Allowances 215 Energy Debt and Equity 221 Oil 225 Weather 229 Wind 231 Other Material Glossary • Acronyms 237 Analytic Note on Net Revenue Calculations 247 Acknowledgments • Contacts 249 Evaluation Form 253 State of the Markets Report • June 2005 3 4 Federal Energy Regulatory Commission • Office of Market Oversight and Investigations Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY n 2004, U.S. natural gas and electric markets responded Pricing Ito broad upward price pressure as connections among energy markets became tighter. In New England in World oil prices rose 34 percent in 2004. This created January, for example, a short, severe cold snap pushed upward pressure on many energy commodity prices glob- the operational connections between natural gas and ally and affected energy markets in the United States. For example, electric markets to the limit. During the year, financial energy markets expanded as many participants found it • Average U.S. natural gas prices rose 7 percent nationally easier to enter the financial markets than the associated from 2003 to 2004, following a rise of 68 percent from physical natural gas and electric markets. Global influ- 2002 to 2003. Regional patterns persisted. Natural gas ences on U.S. energy markets manifested themselves in prices were relatively higher in the Northeast and lower the form of higher oil prices and (early in 2005) in an in the West. early but developing North Atlantic spot market for • Spot coal prices rose 69 percent for eastern (central natural gas. Appalachian) coal, and 7 percent for western (Powder State of the Markets Timeline: 2004 tion) tatus o PJM; (Conjunc t e es rganizationegrate s int sion o ork Cityonfidenc fails umberas indic ll omic dispa load record owerSO int tems trics agreement ation transmis to New Younces c ight & P eporting monthly n g akes landfa lectric sys YC mitig s newing peak year eal-time econ ommon me egional I start r egrates into MI ngland cold snap unches PJM option ice indices Dayton L sion auctiony coalition ann efines N olumes for eives r nd NG nia reache SO begins r ower int Duquesne integrates into PJM New E enth time dur EIA misreports Exelon/PSEG gas storage announces withdrawals merger tress on gas and e CAI SPP rec AEPS and U.S. renews Volume Federal of production working gas tax in credit storage FERC for approves wind NYISO FERC/MMU Nymex c laTransmis Industr NYISO ComEd r integrates into PlattsPJM a Califor : Hurricane Ivan m 1/14-16: 1/20: 2/12: 2/27: 3/10: 5/1: 5/1: 8/1: 9/8: 9/16 10/1: 10/1: 10/1: 10/4: 11/4: 11/24:12/20:12/28: 1/1/05: puts s in natural gas pr of trades and v for sev Illinois P hits all-time high of 3,322 realiabiltity Bcf planning process $200 $20 Henry Hub Natural Gas Prices ($/MMBtu) Prices Gas Natural Hub Henry $160 $16 $120 $12 1/15/04: $315 $80 $8 $40 $4 Range of Day-Ahead On-Peak PowerPrices ($/MWh) $0 $0 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec State of the Markets Report • June 2005 5 Executive Summary River Basin) coal. Spot coal prices can influence electric • A cold snap in New England in January 2004 under- power prices significantly, because marginal generators scored the importance of tight integration between the can choose to sell the coal or burn it to sell power. gas and electric markets during periods of stress. Because large quantities of coal are purchased under Although the two markets successfully responded to the long-term contracts with specified prices, overall aver- severe weather, both industries subsequently analyzed age prices for coal rose only 6 percent. the event to learn how they could coordinate better in the future. • Sulphur dioxide (SO2) emissions allowance prices rose by 153 percent in 2004. SO2 allowances were a major • Hurricane Ivan hit producing regions of the Gulf Coast input for coal-fired plants without scrubbers, adding as in September, reducing overall gas production in the much as $17.40 per MWh to a plant’s cost. United States by almost 1 percent. This probably con- tributed to a price increase in October. Electricity prices followed the pattern set by fuel and emis- sions prices. Investment • In most regions where natural gas tended to be on the As a whole, the U.S. electric industry had significant over- margin (e.g., New England, New York, Texas, and for capacity in generation in 2004. Appropriately, the markets on-peak hours at PJM West) prices increased by less than signaled no need for new capacity nationally. At the same 5 percent. Florida and California both depended heavi- time, specific constrained regions did not have adequate ly on natural gas, and their price increases were 8 to 12 capacity. These areas included Boston, southwest percent on peak—higher than for other gas-dependent Connecticut, New York City, New Orleans, much of south- areas. ern California, and the San Francisco Bay Area. Most of these areas also saw prices too low to signal new investment. • In areas where western coal tended to be on the margin (e.g., the Southwest and Great Plains), on-peak price • In regions without location-specific pricing, price increases were less than 6 percent. signals cannot distinguish between areas that need capacity and those that do not. Such regions include • Where eastern coal (and associated emissions those outside regional transmission organizations allowances) tended to be on the margin, prices rose (RTOs); areas within RTOs that do not yet have RTO- more. In the Southeast and the Midwest, on-peak managed spot markets (Southwest Power Pool—SPP— power prices rose by 11 to 19 percent. Off-peak prices in and the Midwest Independent System Operator— these regions increased even more, as much as 33 per- MISO—in 2004); and zones within RTOs with zonal cent. Similarly, at PJM West, where coal was more often pricing (California and Texas). on the margin during off-peak hours, the average off- peak price increase was 25 percent. • In New England, the independent system operator (ISO-NE) took many generators “out of market” and RTO markets continued to administratively adjust prices, required them to run for reliability reasons, reducing especially in reaction to market power concerns in price signals. The practice of pricing generators individ- constrained areas. ually was so common that almost no difference existed between the market prices that ISO-NE published for Weather and Its Effects on Markets energy in areas that were constrained versus those with- out constraints. Weather put little stress on energy markets during most of the year.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Planning for Wind Energy
    Planning for Wind Energy Suzanne Rynne, AICP , Larry Flowers, Eric Lantz, and Erica Heller, AICP , Editors American Planning Association Planning Advisory Service Report Number 566 Planning for Wind Energy is the result of a collaborative part- search intern at APA; Kirstin Kuenzi is a research intern at nership among the American Planning Association (APA), APA; Joe MacDonald, aicp, was program development se- the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), the nior associate at APA; Ann F. Dillemuth, aicp, is a research American Wind Energy Association (AWEA), and Clarion associate and co-editor of PAS Memo at APA. Associates. Funding was provided by the U.S. Department The authors thank the many other individuals who con- of Energy under award number DE-EE0000717, as part of tributed to or supported this project, particularly the plan- the 20% Wind by 2030: Overcoming the Challenges funding ners, elected officials, and other stakeholders from case- opportunity. study communities who participated in interviews, shared The report was developed under the auspices of the Green documents and images, and reviewed drafts of the case Communities Research Center, one of APA’s National studies. Special thanks also goes to the project partners Centers for Planning. The Center engages in research, policy, who reviewed the entire report and provided thoughtful outreach, and education that advance green communities edits and comments, as well as the scoping symposium through planning. For more information, visit www.plan- participants who worked with APA and project partners to ning.org/nationalcenters/green/index.htm. APA’s National develop the outline for the report: James Andrews, utilities Centers for Planning conduct policy-relevant research and specialist at the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission; education involving community health, natural and man- Jennifer Banks, offshore wind and siting specialist at AWEA; made hazards, and green communities.
    [Show full text]
  • Stephen John Stadler
    STEPHEN JOHN STADLER Professor Fall 2018 Address: Department of Geography Oklahoma State University Stillwater, Oklahoma 74078-4073 Phones: Office (405) 744-9172 Home (405) 624-2176 Fax: Office (405) 744-5620 Electronic mail: [email protected] EDUCATION Date Institution Degree 1979 Indiana State University Ph.D (Physical Geography) 1976 Miami University M.A. (Geography) 1973 Miami University B.S. Ed., Cum Laude, (Social Studies) PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE 2017-Date National Geographic Society Geography Steward of Oklahoma 2015-Date State Geographer Emeritus of Oklahoma (gubernatorial designation) 1993-Date Professor, Department of Geography Oklahoma State University 2013-Date President, Oklahoma Alliance for Geography Education 2012-Date Member, Smart Energy Source team 2011-Date Member, National Energy Solutions Institute committee, Oklahoma State University 2009-Date Geography Program Advisory Board, University of Central Oklahoma 2008-2008 Elected Representative, Oklahoma State University Faculty Council 2008-Date Wind Turbine Program advisory board, Oklahoma State University—Oklahoma City 2008-Date Geography Program advisory board, University of Central Oklahoma 2004-2015 The State Geographer of Oklahoma (gubernatorial appointment) 2004-Date Member, State GIS Council 2004-Date Board Member, Oklahoma Alliance for Geographic Education 1988-Date Steering Committee, Oklahoma Mesonetwork Project 1991-1994 Faculty Supervisor, OSU Center for Applications of Remote Sensing 1985-1993 Associate Professor, Department of Geography, Oklahoma State University. 1980-1985 Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, Oklahoma State University. 1979-1980 Temporary Assistant Professor, Department of Geography, Michigan State University. Spring 1979 Instructor, Indiana State University Short Course in Remote Sensing. Spring 1978 Lecturer, Department of Earth and Space Sciences, Indiana University - Purdue University at Fort Wayne.
    [Show full text]
  • Usa Wind Energy Resources
    USA WIND ENERGY RESOURCES © M. Ragheb 2/7/2021 “An acre of windy prairie could produce between $4,000 and $10,000 worth of electricity per year.” Dennis Hayes INTRODUCTION Wind power accounted for 6 percent of the USA’s total electricity generation capacity, compared with 19 percent for Nuclear Power generation. A record 13.2 GWs of rated wind capacity were installed in 2012 including 5.5 GWs in December 2012, the most ever for a single month. The total rated wind capacity stands at about 60 GWs. Utilities are buying wind power because they want to, not because they have to, to benefit from the Production Tax Credit PTC incentive. The credit has been extended for a year to cover wind farms that start construction in 2013. Previously it only covered projects that started working by the expiration date. Asset financing for USA wind farms was $4.3 billion in the second-half compared with $9.6 billion in the first six months of 2012. Component makers are the General Electric Company (GE), Siemens AG, Vestas AS, Gamesa Corp Tecnologica SA and Clipper Windpower Ltd., which is owned by Platinum Equity LLC. Equipment prices for wind have dropped by more than 21 percent since 2010, and the performance of turbines has risen. This has resulted in a 21 percent decrease in the overall cost of electricity from wind for a typical USA project since 2010. From 2006 to 2012 USA domestic manufacturing facilities for wind turbine components has grown 12 times to more than 400 facilities in 43 states.
    [Show full text]
  • Direct Testimony of *******
    STATE OF MAINE LAND USE REGULATION COMMISION In the matter of Rezoning Application ZP 702 Maine Mountain Power, LLC PRE-FILED DIRECT TESTIMONY OF THOMAS A HEWSON JR ON BEHALF OF THE FRIENDS OF THE WESTERN MOUNTAINS Q: PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, OCCUPATION AND BUSINESS ADDRESS. A: My name is Thomas A Hewson Jr. I have been an energy and environmental consultant for 30 years. Since 1981, I have been a Principal at Energy Ventures Analysis that is located at 1901 N. Moore St. Suite 1200, Arlington, Virginia, 22209-1706. My resume and relevant experience to the issues in this proceeding are provided in Exhibit TAH-1. Q: ON WHOSE BEHALF ARE YOU SUBMITTING TESTIMONY? A: I am submitting testimony on behalf of the Friends of the Western Mountains. Q: PLEASE DESCRIBE THE ASSIGNMENT YOU WERE GIVEN FOR THIS PROCEEDING A: I was asked to review the information Maine Mountain Power LLC has provided on the 90 MW Redington Mountain Wind project in its rezoning application to the Maine Land Use Regulation Commission and provide an independent opinion on its claims of power output, project need, local economic benefits and pollution prevention claims. 1 Q: COULD YOU SUMMARIZE YOUR FINDINGS? A: My testimony covers four areas. My major findings discussed in my testimony are: • Project output estimates unsupported and likely overstated • No demonstrated need for the Redington Mountain Wind project • Project’s local economic impacts unstudied with no examination of offsetting economic costs • Project will provide no incremental air pollution control benefits Q: HAVE YOU REVIEWED MAINE MOUNTAIN POWER LLC’S REZONING APPLICATION? A: Yes, I have reviewed their rezoning application.
    [Show full text]
  • Wind Energy Permitting
    14. Permitting New York State recently adopted the Power New York Act, which includes Article X, legislation establishing a state-level process for permitting electrical generation facilities of 25 MW and larger capacity. Under Article X, utility scale wind farms are now sited and permitted by a state siting commission, rather than by local municipalities. However, the state siting commission may defer to local ordinances, or it may overrule local requirements it considers to place an unreasonable burden on the applicant; so it remains incumbent upon municipalities to establish zoning and/or planning ordinances that balance wind energy’s clean electricity generation potential with the public health, safety, welfare concerns that may be involved. Furthermore, residential scale wind turbines, and wind farms of less than 25 MW, will still fall under local municipal control. This section is intended to provide local officials with the information and tools needed to create meaningful and reasonable zoning and planning documents for wind energy facilities. 14.1. Local Ordinance Options and Examples Effective wind ordinance standards should address several objectives, including: ensuring public safety, expressing local preferences, identifying and minimizing on- and off-site impacts, promoting good land use practice, informing and involving the public and providing legal defensibility. Clear and reasonable standards provide fairness for towns, wind developers and the public, and make it less likely that local standards will be overruled in the siting and permitting process. For small wind farms and residential scale turbines, clear standards can help make for a smooth and expeditious review process. Local Review Options A town does not have to employ zoning to develop and adopt a wind energy ordinance, although it is preferable as it better assures that the town will get the type of development it wants.
    [Show full text]
  • Vol. 79 Friday, No. 45 March 7, 2014 Pages 12923–13188
    Vol. 79 Friday, No. 45 March 7, 2014 Pages 12923–13188 OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL REGISTER VerDate Mar 15 2010 19:42 Mar 06, 2014 Jkt 232001 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 4710 Sfmt 4710 E:\FR\FM\07MRWS.LOC 07MRWS mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with FEDREGWS II Federal Register / Vol. 79, No. 45 / Friday, March 7, 2014 The FEDERAL REGISTER (ISSN 0097–6326) is published daily, SUBSCRIPTIONS AND COPIES Monday through Friday, except official holidays, by the Office PUBLIC of the Federal Register, National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC 20408, under the Federal Register Subscriptions: Act (44 U.S.C. Ch. 15) and the regulations of the Administrative Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 Committee of the Federal Register (1 CFR Ch. I). The Assistance with public subscriptions 202–512–1806 Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC 20402 is the exclusive distributor of the official General online information 202–512–1530; 1–888–293–6498 edition. Periodicals postage is paid at Washington, DC. Single copies/back copies: The FEDERAL REGISTER provides a uniform system for making Paper or fiche 202–512–1800 available to the public regulations and legal notices issued by Assistance with public single copies 1–866–512–1800 Federal agencies. These include Presidential proclamations and (Toll-Free) Executive Orders, Federal agency documents having general FEDERAL AGENCIES applicability and legal effect, documents required to be published Subscriptions: by act of Congress, and other Federal agency documents of public interest. Paper or fiche 202–741–6005 Documents are on file for public inspection in the Office of the Assistance with Federal agency subscriptions 202–741–6005 Federal Register the day before they are published, unless the issuing agency requests earlier filing.
    [Show full text]
  • Competitiveness of Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency in U.S
    INSTITUTEAEE COMPETITIVENESS OF RENEWABLE ENERGY AND ENERGY EFFICIENCY IN U.S. MARKETS June 2015 This report was prepared by the Advanced Energy Economy Institute with assistance from Sarah Hill of S.E. Hill & Associates. ABOUT AEE INSTITUTE The Advanced Energy Economy Institute (AEE Institute) is a 501(c)(3) charitable organization whose mission is to raise awareness of the public benefits and opportunities of advanced energy. AEE Institute provides critical data to drive the policy discussion on key issues through commissioned research and reports, data aggregation, and analytic tools. AEE Institute also provides a forum where leaders can address energy challenges and opportunities facing the United States. AEE Institute is affiliated with Advanced Energy Economy (AEE), a 501(c)(6) business association, whose purpose is to advance and promote the common business interests of its members and the advanced energy industry as a whole. www.aee.net/aeei @aeenet / Washington DC San Francisco Boston TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary i 1.0 Introduction 1 2.0 Market Realities vs. Projections 2 2.1 Renewable Energy 3 2.1.1 Solar Power 3 2.1.2 Wind Power 5 2.1.3 Shortcomings of the AEO Modeling Framework 5 2.2 Energy Efficiency 6 3.0 RE and EE: Choosing Value 8 3.1 Renewable Energy 8 3.1.1 Renewable Energy Market Dynamics and Trends 11 3.1.2 Innovation in Renewable Energy Financing 12 3.2 Energy Efficiency 13 4.0 Conclusion 19 www.aee.net/aeei @aeenet / Washington DC San Francisco Boston EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Questions have been raised about whether renewable energy (RE) and energy efficiency (EE) resources can provide substantial emission reductions at reasonable cost under EPA’s proposed Clean Power Plan (CPP).
    [Show full text]
  • 2020 Woody Tanya Thesis.Pdf (2.403Mb)
    UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA GRADUATE COLEGE ‘WHEN THE WIND COMES RIGHT BEHIND THE’ … SALES PITCH: ALTERNATIVE VIEWS TO WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT IN A RURAL OKLAHOMA HOST COMMUNITY A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE FACULTY in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE By TANYA S. WOODY Norman, Oklahoma 2020 ‘WHEN THE WIND COMES RIGHT BEHIND THE’ … SALES PITCH: ALTERNATIVE VIEWS TO WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT IN A RURAL OKLAHOMA HOST COMMUNITY A THESIS APPROVED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY AND ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY APPROVED BY THE COMMITTEE CONSISTING OF: Dr. Jeffrey Widener, Chair Dr. Scott Greene Dr. Travis Gliedt © Copyright by TANYA S. WOODY 2020 All Rights Reserved. ABSTRACT ‘WHEN THE WIND COMES RIGHT BEHIND THE’ … SALES PITCH: ALTERNATIVE VIEWS TO WIND ENERGY DEVELOPMENT IN A RURAL OKLAHOMA HOST COMMUNITY By Tanya S. Woody Wind energy development has expanded across the prairie of northwest Oklahoma over the past 17 years. Several factors contributed to the success of wind energy in the state including a volatile economy history spurring a need to diversify the energy-based economy, ideal wind power potential, and state and host community support fueled by a rural benefit narrative. Starting in the early 2000s, the state and rural oil and gas communities familiar with the hardships of volatile fuel markets embraced wind projects as a means to strengthen their local economies and ameliorate rural disadvantages. Literature on the impacts and perceptions of wind energy benefits for host communities, however, remains divided, and little is known about realistic effects and perceptions in the context of a pre-existing energy culture and economy.
    [Show full text]
  • Green Power Marketing in the United States: a Status Report
    September 2004 • NREL/TP-620-36823 Green Power Marketing in the United States: A Status Report Seventh Edition Lori Bird and Blair Swezey National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Operated for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by Midwest Research Institute • Battelle Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337 September 2004 • NREL/TP-620-36823 Green Power Marketing in the United States: A Status Report Seventh Edition Lori Bird and Blair Swezey Prepared under Task No. ASG4.1003 National Renewable Energy Laboratory 1617 Cole Boulevard, Golden, Colorado 80401-3393 303-275-3000 • www.nrel.gov Operated for the U.S. Department of Energy Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy by Midwest Research Institute • Battelle Contract No. DE-AC36-99-GO10337 NOTICE This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States government. Neither the United States government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States government or any agency thereof.
    [Show full text]
  • Oklahoma Renewable Energy Policy Encounters a COVID Roadblock: 2019-2020
    Texas A&M Journal of Property Law Volume 7 Number 3 Oil & Gas Survey Article 18 5-12-2021 Oklahoma Renewable Energy Policy Encounters a COVID Roadblock: 2019-2020 Warigia M. Bowman University of Tulsa College of Law, [email protected] Debbie Firestone [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.tamu.edu/journal-of-property-law Part of the Oil, Gas, and Mineral Law Commons, and the Property Law and Real Estate Commons Recommended Citation Warigia M. Bowman & Debbie Firestone, Oklahoma Renewable Energy Policy Encounters a COVID Roadblock: 2019-2020, 7 Tex. A&M J. Prop. L. 512 (2021). Available at: https://doi.org/10.37419/JPL.V7.I3.18 This Student Article is brought to you for free and open access by Texas A&M Law Scholarship. It has been accepted for inclusion in Texas A&M Journal of Property Law by an authorized editor of Texas A&M Law Scholarship. For more information, please contact [email protected]. OKLAHOMA RENEWABLE ENERGY POLICY ENCOUNTERS A COVID ROADBLOCK: 2019–2020 Warigia Bowman and Debbie Firestone1 I. INTRODUCTION: OKLAHOMA RENEWABLE POLICY IS STILL UNDER “CONSTRUCTION” On the road to energy security, independence, and success, this past year Oklahoma has seen “construction” projects in the works. Renewable energy, however, hit a major roadblock in the form of the COVID-19 pandemic. Historically, Oklahoma produced most of its electricity through coal and natural gas.2 In the past decade, renewable sources like wind and solar energy represent a growing segment of electricity generation in the state. In 2019 and 2020, Oklahoma developed a stronger renewable energy policy by enacting legislation, passing administrative decisions, and passing local city ordinances.
    [Show full text]
  • Impacts of Wind Power Projects on Residential Property Values
    PLEASANT RIDGE EXHIBIT 31 LBNL-2829E ERNEST ORLANDO LAWRENCE BERKELEY NATIONAL LABORATORY The Impact of Wind Power Projects on Residential Property Values in the United States: A Multi-Site Hedonic Analysis Ben Hoen, Ryan Wiser, Peter Cappers, Mark Thayer, and Gautam Sethi 1) Environmental Energy Technologies Division December 2009 Download from http://eetd.lbl.gov/EA/EMP The work described in this report was funded by the Office of Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (Wind & Hydropower Technologies Program) of the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02- 05CH1123. i Disclaimer This document was prepared as an account of work sponsored by the United States Government. While this document is believed to contain correct information, neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor The Regents of the University of California, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, express or implied, or assumes any legal responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by its trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise, does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof, or The Regents of the University of California. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof, or The Regents of the University of California. Ernest Orlando Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory is an equal opportunity employer.
    [Show full text]
  • Quarterly Report, Q1 2021
    Q1 2021 Quarterly Report: WilderHill Clean Energy Index®, March 31, 2021 The Clean Energy Index® (ECO) started 1st Quarter & 2021 near 215, and it ended Q1 around 200, down roughly -7%. After +205% gains 2020 when this decarbonization story rose 6-fold, for a best performance of most any Index or Fund anywhere, a sell-off was maybe overdue. Thus, it wasn’t so surprising especially after seeing ECO Index® drop by one-half in Feb/March of 2020 – to see it drop hard within Q1 by one-third February/March 2021 from 280 to 180. Volatility is partly due to big, pro-clean energy policies increasingly now happening for this theme worldwide. Since start of 2017 when ECO was at 38, it’s now up +410%. As we emphasize, ECO, global NEX, & OCEAN themes passively capture volatile risky themes, so can & will at times ‘drop like a rock’. Big gains may occur, bigger drops too. Yet fresh attention *may* continue to be paid here; solar is about to become the lowest & best-priced electricity anywhere, anytime in history. Potentially, this may mean vast new demand ahead from US, Europe, and Asia. As infrastructure and good jobs, equity & social justice – overlap with climate change solutions - there may be moves ahead. Not just in solar, perhaps too in offshore & onshore wind, batteries, energy storage, electric vehicles, new green hydrogen, fuel cells, ESG, and the deep decarbonization of everything – unlike anything before. Last 5 years, original Benchmark ECO Index® live since 2004 and 1st for climate solutions is up +400% to early-March.
    [Show full text]