DOCSLIB.ORG

III. Green Line Responds to ISO-NE Long-Term Reliability Needs

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
III. Green Line Responds to ISO-NE Long-Term Reliability Needs New England ITC March 31, 2008 Bob Ethier, Chief Economist Stephen Rourke, Vice President, System Planning ISO New England Inc. One Sullivan Road Holyoke, Massachusetts 01040 RE: Economic Study Request Dear Mr. Ethier and Mr. Rourke, The New England Independent Transmission Company, LLC (“NEITC”) in accordance with Section II - Attachment K Part 4.1 (b) of ISO-New England’s Open Access Transmission Tariff relating to the Regional System Planning Process, hereby submits a Request for an Economic Study of the Regional Benefits of increased transmission capacity between northern Maine and the northeast Massachusetts market (“NEMA”). NEITC makes this request as qualified stakeholder in ISO-New England based on the following: • NEITC is a New England Power Pool (“NEPOOL”) participant and votes as provisional member in the Transmission Sector. • NEITC meets the independence and capability requirements of ISO-NE under its OATT, as stated in a February 20, 2007, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC”) Declaratory Order (Attached). • NEITC has negotiated an “Independent Transmission Company” Agreement with ISO-NE that is currently before the NEPOOL’s Transmission Committee for an advisory vote. NEITC is requesting this study to address problems that, based on studies conducted by ISO-NE and others, will adversely effect the economic and reliable operation of the New England power grid as early as 2015. Problems have been identified in the following areas: New England Independent Transmission Company, LLC 301 Edgewater Place, Suite 220 Wakefield, Massachusetts 01880 Phone: 781-246-9851 New England ITC • lack of fuel diversity in the region, in particular an increased dependence on fossil fuels (particularly natural gas) and the associated high price and volatility connected with continuing and increasing that dependence, • challenges to meeting resource adequacy requirements by 2016 where the lack of transmission transfer capacity limits the development of generating resources in parts of the system, particularly northern Maine where construction prices are likely to be lowest, thus limiting competition amongst generators throughout the region, • failure to meet state environmental regulatory requirements for Renewable Portfolio Standards (“RPS”) and the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (“RGGI”) without the addition of thousands of megawatts of non-fossil generating resources within New England and/or from imports, • operational challenges to the grid that could result from the addition large amounts of intermittent resources to the grid without increasing the robustness of the grid to manage such resources, • transmission congestion between northern and southern New England and the need to increase interface limits in order to economically and reliably incorporate more non-carbon resources that will be developed in northern New England and imported from eastern Canada in order to meet RPS and RGGI goals, • the need for up to 850 MW of new resources in the Boston Import Area by 2016 to meet installed capacity requirements, • the need to increase interface limits across the North/South interface between northern and southern New England and in particular the need to increase the import capability to the Boston Import Area by 2016, • the need for dynamic VAR support within the ISO system, and • the need for fast start resources in the event of extreme contingencies, such as a loss of fuel source in Boston or northern Maine. In making the request for this study, NEITC references the presentation that I gave to the June 2007 NECPUC meeting (and attached to this request) entitled “Using Transmission to Effect a Green Power Paradigm Change: How We Can Get 2,500 MW of Green Power into Massachusetts and Southern New England by 2013”. The presentation provides the general outline of the solution to the problems identified above. Moreover, it references NEITC’s Green Line project as holding particular promise in addressing these problems. Green Line is a 500 kV HVDC system with AC/DC converter stations connected to the 345 kV AC substations located in the Wiscasset, Maine and Boston, Massachusetts that is capable of bi-directionally transferring at least 660 MW of energy between NEMA and northern Maine. (The project could be increased to 1,200 MW, with the delivery of 660 MW of power to two locations within NEMA if the ISO wished to do a sensitivity analysis around that option.). Green Line was described in NEITC’s presentation to the New England Independent Transmission Company, LLC 301 Edgewater Place, Suite 220 Wakefield, Massachusetts 01880 Phone: 781-246-9851 New England ITC ISO’s Planning Advisory Committee (“PAC”) at its “HVDC Day” on December 18, 2007. That presentation, as well as NEITC’s “Introductory Project Proposal to ISO-NE” submitted to ISO-NE on December 5, 2006 as part of our FERC filing on December 10, 2006 are also attached as reference and support to this request. Economic Analysis NEITC is aware that Attachment K of the ISO-NE Tariff stipulates that ISO-NE’s stakeholders may request the ISO to initiate a Needs Assessment to evaluate potential regulated transmission solutions if that could result in a net reduction of total production costs to supply load, reduced congestion, and the integration of new resources and/or loads. In addition to responding to these Attachment K provisions, NEITC also understands that ISO-NE, in concert with other New England stakeholders, has formed a Working Group to consider other factors that may be addressed in association with the Economic Studies. This letter comes early in the deliberations of this Working Group, hence the Working Group and ISO-NE have not yet created a specific template for a Request for an Economic Study of the Regional Benefits of a proposed transmission project pursuant to Attachment K. In the absence of such a template, NEITC has reviewed the experience of others ISOs and RTOs, which has been helpful in framing the request that follows. NEITC agrees that the starting point for the Economic Analysis of the effects of a 660/1200MW expansion in transfer capacity between northern Maine the NEMA market are the criteria identified in Attachment N, specifically, “the total production cost to supply the system load.” NEITC further agrees that economic transmission projects should generally be expected to make a positive contribution to regional energy costs, or, as stated in the ISO-NE Tariff, that “the net present value of the net reduction in total cost to supply the system load, as determined by the ISO, exceeds the net present value of the carrying cost of the identified transmission upgrades.” Such analyses of total production cost effects can be conducted with many scenarios of alternative fuel costs and generation assumptions, and as such have been and should remain the starting point of the Economic Analysis. However, as presented in Attachment K, other factors, such as reduced congestion and the integration of new resources and/or loads, should also be considered. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, many state governments, and other observers (as well as Attachment K) have recognized and demonstrated that reductions in total regional production costs are the foundation of a larger and more comprehensive analysis, which, for an Economic Study like this, would typically include but are not necessarily be limited to the following additional criteria: New England Independent Transmission Company, LLC 301 Edgewater Place, Suite 220 Wakefield, Massachusetts 01880 Phone: 781-246-9851 New England ITC • The economic benefits of the greater degree of compliance with Regional Portfolio Standards (“RPS”), Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (“RGGI”) requirements, and other environmental standards resulting from the 660/1200MW expansion in transfer capacity between northern Maine and the NEMA market 1; • The economic benefits that the 660/1200MW expansion in transfer capacity between northern Maine and the NEMA market would provide by increasing the region’s generation portfolio diversity2; • The economic benefits the 660/1200MW expansion in transfer capacity between northern Maine and the NEMA market confers by enhancing reliability and competition in the NEMA load area, where generation solutions are typically expected to have substantially higher costs than generators located elsewhere. • The economic benefits the 660/1200MW expansion in transfer capacity between northern Maine and the NEMA market creates by enhancing the reliability and operations associated with the Northern New England transmission system; • The economic benefits the 660/1200MW expansion in transfer capacity between northern Maine and the NEMA market creates by increasing the access to the substantial amounts of unused summer exports from New Brunswick and Quebec3; • The economic benefits the 660/1200MW expansion in transfer capacity between northern Maine the NEMA market creates by increasing competition in market areas where reliability-must-run contracts have traditionally been needed, or 1 For example, ISO-NE’s Scenario Planning Analysis shows that RPS and RGGI standards are satisfied only in the “renewables” and “import” scenarios (p. 66). These two scenarios increase fuel diversity by reducing reliance on natural gas, as well as lowering the market price for energy by up to 13% (p.48). 2 In the absence of more North-South transmission, for example, it is expected that New England’s dependence on natural gas, and specifically, Liquified Natural Gas (LNG) imports, will increase. The price outlook for LNG is extremely complex, and stakeholders will benefit from an ISO-NE review of the risk factors of LNG. 3 The Green Line provides market access to currently “bottled-up” NPCC summer generating capacity in Eastern Canada. This includes 1500 MW excess Maritimes summer capacity (mostly New Brunswick) and 4500 MW of excess summer capacity in Quebec (approx. 600 MW accessible from New Brunswick). Access to this generation will help firm up wind capacity and allow the integration of wind and Canadian resources from a resource adequacy and forward capacity market perspective. It will also help avoid construction of “duplicate” capacity (more natural gas) in Southern New England.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Competing to Overcharge Consumers: the Competitive Electric Supplier Market in Massachusetts
    Why Competing to Overcharge Consumers: The Competitive Electric Supplier Market in Massachusetts April 2018 By Jenifer Bosco National Consumer Law Center® © Copyright 2018, National Consumer Law Center, Inc. All rights reserved. ABOUT THE AUTHORS Jenifer Bosco is a staff attorney at the National Consumer Law Center (NCLC) with a focus on energy and utility issues that affect low-income consumers. Prior to joining NCLC, she was the first director of the Office of Patient Protection at the Massachusetts Health Policy Commission. Previously, Jen advocated for low-income clients at Health Law Advocates, the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute and Merrimack Valley Legal Services. She also served as an Assistant Attorney General with the Office of the Massachusetts Attorney General and began her legal career as a law clerk for the Massachusetts Superior Court. Jen holds a J.D. from Georgetown University Law Center and a B.A. from Boston College. She is a co-author of Access to Utility Services and a contributing author to Collection Actions and Consumer Banking and Payments Law. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The author thanks NCLC Senior Attorney Charlie Harak and NCLC Deputy Director Carolyn Carter for their insightful reviews and comments, and Ana Girón-Vives of NCLC for her research and data analysis. Barbara Alexander generously shared her extensive knowledge of competitive supply markets and provided invaluable support and insight. The author also thanks Elizabeth Berube of Citizens for Citizens, Inc., Darlene Gallant of Lynn Economic Opportunity, Richard Berkley of the Public Utility Law Project of New York, and NCLC colleagues Olivia Wein, John Howat, Jan Kruse, Svetlana Ladan, and Cleef Milien for their invaluable assistance.
    [Show full text]
  • The Millennial Revolution in Electrical Transmission
    I N S I D E T H E M I N D S Complying with Energy and Natural Resources Regulations Leading Lawyers on US Energy Markets and Regulators’ Attempts to Provide Oversight 2014 Thomson Reuters/Aspatore All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America. No part of this publication may be reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a database or retrieval system, except as permitted under Sections 107 or 108 of the U.S. Copyright Act, without prior written permission of the publisher. This book is printed on acid free paper. Material in this book is for educational purposes only. This book is sold with the understanding that neither any of the authors nor the publisher is engaged in rendering legal, accounting, investment, or any other professional service. Neither the publisher nor the authors assume any liability for any errors or omissions or for how this book or its contents are used or interpreted or for any consequences resulting directly or indirectly from the use of this book. For legal advice or any other, please consult your personal lawyer or the appropriate professional. The views expressed by the individuals in this book (or the individuals on the cover) do not necessarily reflect the views shared by the companies they are employed by (or the companies mentioned in this book). The employment status and affiliations of authors with the companies referenced are subject to change. For customer service inquiries, please e-mail [email protected]. If you are interested in purchasing the book this chapter was originally included in, please visit www.west.thomson.com.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 2 SCHEDULE 21 – VEC LOCAL SERVICE SCHEDULE of VERMONT ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC
    SCHEDULE 21 – VEC LOCAL SERVICE SCHEDULE OF VERMONT ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. Page 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Schedule 21 – VEC LOCAL SERVICE SCHEDULE I. Common Service Provisions 1 Definitions 1.1 Definitions 1.2 Firm Local Point-to-Point Transmission Service 1.3 Independent System Operator 1.4 Load Ratio Share 1.5 Load Shedding 1.6 Local Network Customer 1.7 Local Network Load 1.8 Local Network Operating Agreement 1.9 Local Network Operating Committee 1.10 Local Network Upgrades 1.11 Local Non-Firm Sale 1.12 Local Service Agreement 1.13 Local Transmission Customer 1.14 Non-Firm Local Point-to-Point Transmission Service 1.15 Parties 1.16 Phase I/Phase II HVDC Facilities 1.17 Reserved 1.18 Short-Term Firm Local Point-to-Point Transmission Service 1.19 Transmission Owner 1.20 Transmission Owner 1.21 VEC 1.22 VEC’s Monthly Transmission System Peak 1.23 VTransco 2 Initial Allocation and Renewal Procedures Page 3 2.1 Reservation Priority For Existing Firm Service Customers 3 Ancillary Services 4 Billing and Payment 4.1 Billing Procedure 4.2 Interest on Unpaid Balances 4.3 Customer Default 5 Accounting for VEC’s Use of the Tariff 5.1 Transmission Revenues 5.2 Study Costs and Revenues 6 Regulatory Filings 7 Creditworthiness 8 Dispute Resolution Procedures 8.1 Internal Dispute Resolution Procedures 8.2 External Arbitration Procedures 8.3 Arbitration Decisions 8.4 Costs 8.5 Rights Under the Federal Power Act II. LOCAL POINT-TO-POINT TRANSMISSION SERVICE 9 Preamble 9.1 Classification of Firm Local Transmission Service 9.2 Classification of Non-Firm
    [Show full text]
  • Transmission Planning Technical Guide
    Transmission Planning Technical Guide © ISO New England Inc. System Planning REVISION: 5.0 EFFECTIVE DATE: 09/13/2019 NOTE: Additional updates continuing to review the content of the guide in further detail to match current processes and procedures will follow. ISO-NE PUBLIC TPTG Disclaimer The provisions in this document are intended to be consistent with ISO New England’s Tariff. If, however, the provisions in this planning document conflict with the Tariff in any way, the Tariff takes precedence as the ISO is bound to operate in accordance with the ISO New England Tariff. Revision: 5.0 – Effective Date: 09/13/2019 page iii ISO-NE PUBLIC TPTG Contents Disclaimer............................................................................................................................................................................. iii Contents ............................................................................................................................................................................... iv Figures ................................................................................................................................................................................. vii Tables................................................................................................................................................................................... vii Section 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • January 26, 2021 VIA ELECTRONIC FILING the Honorable Kimberly D
    January 26, 2021 VIA ELECTRONIC FILING The Honorable Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20426 Re: Revisions to Schedule 24 of the ISO New England Open Access Transmission Tariff to Comply with Order No. 676-I; ISO New England Inc. and New England Power Pool, Docket No. ER21-___-000 Dear Secretary Bose: Pursuant to Section 205 of the Federal Power Act (“FPA”)1 and Order No. 676-I,2 ISO New England Inc. (the “ISO” or “ISO-NE”)3 joined by the New England Power Pool (“NEPOOL”) Participants Committee4 (together, the “Filing Parties”), hereby electronically submit to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (“FERC” or “Commission”) revisions to Schedule 24 – Incorporation by Reference of NAESB Standards (“Schedule 24”) of the ISO OATT to include certain updated business practice standards adopted by the Wholesale Electric Quadrant (“WEQ”) of the North American Energy Standards Board (“NAESB”) and incorporated by reference in the Commission’s regulations through Order No. 676-I (the “Schedule 24 Revisions”). 1 16 U.S.C. § 824d (2006 and Supp. II 2009). 2 Standards for Business Practices and Communication Protocols for Public Utilities, Order No. 676-I, 170 FERC ¶ 61,062 (2020) (“Order No. 676-I”). 3 Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined in this filing have the meanings ascribed thereto in the ISO’s Transmission, Markets and Services Tariff (the “ISO Tariff”). Section II of the ISO Tariff contains the Open Access Transmission Tariff (the “ISO OATT”). 4 Under New England’s RTO arrangements, the rights to make this filing of changes to Schedule 24 of the ISO OATT under Section 205 of the FPA are the ISO’s.
    [Show full text]
  • New York City Comprehensive Waterfront Plan
    NEW YORK CITY CoMPREHENSWE WATERFRONT PLAN Reclaiming the City's Edge For Public Discussion Summer 1992 DAVID N. DINKINS, Mayor City of New lVrk RICHARD L. SCHAFFER, Director Department of City Planning NYC DCP 92-27 NEW YORK CITY COMPREHENSIVE WATERFRONT PLAN CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMA RY 1 INTRODUCTION: SETTING THE COURSE 1 2 PLANNING FRA MEWORK 5 HISTORICAL CONTEXT 5 LEGAL CONTEXT 7 REGULATORY CONTEXT 10 3 THE NATURAL WATERFRONT 17 WATERFRONT RESOURCES AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE 17 Wetlands 18 Significant Coastal Habitats 21 Beaches and Coastal Erosion Areas 22 Water Quality 26 THE PLAN FOR THE NATURAL WATERFRONT 33 Citywide Strategy 33 Special Natural Waterfront Areas 35 4 THE PUBLIC WATERFRONT 51 THE EXISTING PUBLIC WATERFRONT 52 THE ACCESSIBLE WATERFRONT: ISSUES AND OPPORTUNITIES 63 THE PLAN FOR THE PUBLIC WATERFRONT 70 Regulatory Strategy 70 Public Access Opportunities 71 5 THE WORKING WATERFRONT 83 HISTORY 83 THE WORKING WATERFRONT TODAY 85 WORKING WATERFRONT ISSUES 101 THE PLAN FOR THE WORKING WATERFRONT 106 Designation Significant Maritime and Industrial Areas 107 JFK and LaGuardia Airport Areas 114 Citywide Strategy fo r the Wo rking Waterfront 115 6 THE REDEVELOPING WATER FRONT 119 THE REDEVELOPING WATERFRONT TODAY 119 THE IMPORTANCE OF REDEVELOPMENT 122 WATERFRONT DEVELOPMENT ISSUES 125 REDEVELOPMENT CRITERIA 127 THE PLAN FOR THE REDEVELOPING WATERFRONT 128 7 WATER FRONT ZONING PROPOSAL 145 WATERFRONT AREA 146 ZONING LOTS 147 CALCULATING FLOOR AREA ON WATERFRONTAGE loTS 148 DEFINITION OF WATER DEPENDENT & WATERFRONT ENHANCING USES
    [Show full text]
  • October 11, 2019 VIA ELECTRONIC FILING
    October 11, 2019 VIA ELECTRONIC FILING Honorable Kimberly D. Bose, Secretary Federal Energy Regulatory Commission 888 First Street, N.E. Washington, DC 20426 Re: ISO New England Inc. and New England Power Pool, Docket No. ER20-___-000; Transmission Planning Improvements Dear Secretary Bose: Pursuant to Section 205 of the Federal Power Act, 1 ISO New England Inc. (the “ISO”) joined by the New England Power Pool (“NEPOOL”) Participants Committee2 (together, the “Filing Parties”), hereby jointly3 submit proposed tariff revisions to enhance the competitive transmission solicitation process and make other improvements to the ISO’s transmission planning process (collectively, “Transmission Planning Improvements”). The Filing Parties are joined by the Participating Transmission Owners Administrative Committee (the “PTO AC”) on behalf of the Participating Transmission Owners (the “PTOs”).4 The PTO AC joins in the revisions to Localized Costs in Section III.B.3 of this transmittal letter. The Tariff changes 1 16 U.S.C. § 824d (2006 and Supp. II 2009). 2 Capitalized terms used but not defined in this filing are intended to have the meaning given to such terms in the ISO New England Inc. Transmission, Markets and Services Tariff (the “Tariff”). Section II of the Tariff is the Open Access Transmission Tariff (“OATT”). 3 Under New England's Regional Transmission Organization arrangements, except as noted below, the rights to make this filing of changes to the OATT under Section 205 of the Federal Power Act are the ISO's. NEPOOL, which pursuant to the Participants Agreement provides the sole market participant stakeholder process for advisory voting on ISO matters, supported the changes reflected in this filing and accordingly, joins in this Section 205 filing.
    [Show full text]
  • Testimony of Edward N. Krapels, Ceo of Anbaric Development Partners, Before the Energy Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, May 10, 2018
    5/7/2018 11:30:31 AM TESTIMONY OF EDWARD N. KRAPELS, CEO OF ANBARIC DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS, BEFORE THE ENERGY SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE ENERGY AND COMMERCE COMMITTEE, MAY 10, 2018 Mr. Chairman, distinguished members of the Energy Subcommittee of the House Energy and Commerce Committee. Thank you for inviting me to testify on the State of Electric Transmission: Investment, Planning, Development and Alternatives. My name is Ed Krapels and I am the founder and CEO of Anbaric. We build the electric businesses of the future. We helped spearhead two high-voltage, direct current buried transmission lines between New Jersey and New York, increasing market efficiency and saving ratepayers hundreds of millions of dollars as a result. This high-voltage direct current technology is common world-wide but not used much in the US – its small size makes it well suited to linking markets in congested areas of the country where construction is difficult. An article I have just published in The Electricity Journal, reviews why -- even though everyone agrees these kinds of interregional transmission links are useful and more are needed -- both existing and new interregional projects are choked off by well-intentioned but unproductive regulations. That article is part of my written testimony. We come here this morning, however, to discuss an extremely important new opportunity in our power industry. Federal energy and environmental policy can accelerate what promises to be a once-in-a-generation chance to launch a new domestic industry – offshore wind -- if we do it smartly and thoughtfully from the start. The key to success is to plan, design and build shared, independent offshore transmission systems – OceanGrids – in each of the participating coastal states.
    [Show full text]
  • 2021 Energy Efficiency Forecast Data Review and Verification: End Use Measure Data
    DECEMBER 7, 2020 | WEBEX 2021 Energy Efficiency Forecast Data Review and Verification: End Use Measure Data Energy Efficiency Forecast Working Group Tim Costa SYSTEM PLANNING ISO-NE PUBLIC Outline • Measure Data Collection Background • Measure Detail – New England Summary • Measure Detail - State Level • Measure Detail – Focus on Connecticut • Energy, Demand, and Cost by Measure ISO-NE PUBLIC 2 Disclaimer • This presentation and data representation are not intended to be used as cost effectiveness tests for Energy efficiency programs. The ISO has no position regarding cost effectiveness. • Measure data is sourced from Program Administrator submissions over the past energy efficiency Forecast data collection cycles. • The dataset is not complete, particularly in the area of dollars spent per measure type. Therefore, analysis is only presented where complete data are available. • All assumptions and conclusions from these representations are preliminary and for informational purpose only. ISO-NE PUBLIC 3 Background on Measure Data • 2012 Forecast – PA data collection process included request to report the measures in each program for 2008-2010, where available. • 2013 Forecast – PA data collection process included a request to report the relative percentage of energy savings for the 10 top measures in each program year 2011, where available. • 2014 Forecast – PA data collection process included a request to report the relative percentages of energy savings, demand savings, and dollars spent for the 10 top measures in each program for years
    [Show full text]
  • Finalized Auction Results Confirm Sufficient Capacity Resources for New England During 2024–2025
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Contact: Ellen Foley (413) 535-4139 Janine Saunders (413) 540-4408 Finalized Auction Results Confirm Sufficient Capacity Resources for New England during 2024–2025 Holyoke, MA—February 26, 2021—Finalized results confirm that New England’s annual capacity auction concluded with sufficient secured resources to meet projected electricity needs three years in the future. ISO New England Inc. filed the results today with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). The filing also includes a list of electricity resources committed to ensuring reliable power for New England for the same period. Capacity acquired and retained The 15th Forward Capacity Market (FCM) auction (FCA 15), conducted on February 8, procured capacity for the June 1, 2024 to May 31, 2025 capacity year. In total, commitments for 34,621 megawatts (MW) were secured. This capacity is comprised of 29,243 MW of generation, 3,891 MW of demand resources, and 1,487 of imports from New York, Québec, Canada and New Brunswick, Canada. More than 2,525 MW of new resources within New England secured obligations. Of this total, approximately 19 MW received their obligations under the renewable technology resource (RTR) designation, which is the last year for this exemption. The eligibility requirements to conduct a substitution auction were not met in this auction, so there are no results to report. Prices FCA 15 concluded with three different prices across four regional capacity zones: Northern New England (NNE), made up of Vermont, Maine and New Hampshire; Maine, which includes Maine alone and is nested within NNE; Southeast New England (SENE), comprising Northeastern Massachusetts, Greater Boston, Southeastern Massachusetts, and Rhode Island; and Rest of Pool (ROP), which includes Connecticut and western and central Massachusetts.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the True Impacts of Champlain Hudson Power Express
    UNDERSTANDING THE TRUE IMPACTS OF CHAMPLAIN HUDSON POWER EXPRESS Prepared by: Energyzt Advisors, LLC Prepared for: Independent Power Producers of New York January 2020 TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................... ES-1 1. OVERVIEW OF CHPE ............................................................................................................. 1 1.1. Evolution of CHPE ....................................................................................................... 3 1.2. 2017 Assessment of Carbon Reductions – Grossly Overstates Benefits ................... 4 1.3. 2019 Climate Mobilization Act – CHPE does not help New York State goals ......... 6 2. SOURCE OF CHPE ENERGY SUPPLY ................................................................................ 11 2.1 Quebec is short capacity and long on energy........................................................... 11 2.2 Hydro-Québec’s excess energy available for exports is limited ............................. 14 2.3 Hydro-Québec firm energy is very expensive ......................................................... 18 3. HYDRO-QUÉBEC WOULD DIVERT ENERGY TO SUPPLY CHPE ................................. 22 3.1. Quebec is interconnected with multiple markets .................................................... 23 3.2. Hydro-Québec has enough transmission capacity to sell its excess energy .......... 26 3.3. Hydro-Québec is motivated to maximize profits ...................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Hydropower Imports
    INCREMENTAL HYDROPOWER IMPORTS WHITEPAPER Fall 2013 New England States Committee on Electricity CONSIDERATIONS, OPTIONS, AND MARKET OVERVIEW REGARDING THE POTENTIAL TO INCREASE HYDROPOWER IMPORTS FROM EASTERN CANADIAN PROVINCES TO NEW ENGLAND New England States Committee on Electricity – Incremental Hydropower Imports Whitepaper Fall 2013 This whitepaper is provided solely as a source of information for New England state policymakers. The information provided is largely drawn from publicly available reports and other documents and should be independently verified before it is relied upon. Any views that may be expressed in or inferred from this whitepaper should not be construed as representing those of NESCOE, any NESCOE Manager, or any state agency or official. 2 New England States Committee on Electricity – Incremental Hydropower Imports Whitepaper Fall 2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................ 6 I. NEW ENGLAND’S COMPETITIVE WHOLESALE ELECTRICITY MARKETS, MECHANISMS TO SATISFY POLICY OBJECTIVES, AND CHALLENGES TO INTEGRATING STATE POLICIES IN THE WHOLESALE MARKETS ........................................................................................................................ 7 A. Electric Industry Restructuring and Generation Divestiture.............................. 7 B. Identifying Least-Cost Resources to Serve Customers and Examples of Existing Mechanisms to Achieve Public Policy Objectives......................................
    [Show full text]