WorldWideScience

Sample records for purpa

  1. Discussion series on PURPA related topics: load management

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Sturgeon, J I

    1980-08-01

    The Discussion Series on PURPA Related Topics is composed of five volumes: Metering, Billing, Information to Customers, Load Management Techniques and Master Metering. These reports are based on twenty-five Demonstration and Implementation projects sponsored and directed during the past five years by the US Department of Energy, Office of Utility Systems. Each of the topics bears directly on one or more of the federal standards contained in the Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA). This volume, Load Management Techniques, relates primarily to the Time-of-Day rates standard, PURPA IB(d)3. The experiences related in this report deal, in part, with the procedures and equipment which are affected when time-of-day rates are implemented. One goal of this report is to describe how people in a variety of settings have dealt with the many practical issues in load management. Another is to highlight the lessons and summarize the experiences of the Project participants. This report does not stand as a manual nor provide prescriptive guidelines on how to deal with the topic. Rather it offers an account for those charged with the responsibility of implementing PURPA requirements to learn from the insights and problems which occurred during the Rate Demonstration projects.

  2. Discussion series on PURPA related topics: information to customers

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Sturgeon, J I

    1980-08-01

    This volume relates primarily to Time-of-Day rates standard, PURPA IB(d)3, and deals with the content and methods of providing rate and conservation information to customers when Time-of-Day rates are used. Information to customers in the Demonstration and Pilot Projects fell mainly into four categories: administrative communications; explanations of new rate structures; information and advice on load management; and facts, recommendations and encouragements about energy conservation and end-use improvement. Administrative communications were about such matters as the existence of Projects, their funding, their periods of performance, the selection of their test customers, conditions of participation, procedural changes during the tests, and the time and conditions of ending the tests. These communications were important to good customer cooperation. All Demonstration Projects devoted considerable effort to the crucial task of clearly explaining the rationale of Time-of-Use (TOU) pricing and the test rate structures. The Projects then presented the concept of TOU pricing as a means of (a) fairly charging customers the true cost of their electricity and (b) rewarding them for shifting consumption to times when costs are less. For the most part, Demonstration Projects gave specific information on the individual customer's own rate structure and none on any others that were under test. The information was presented in face-to-face interviews, group presentations, television, radio, and print media, and traveling exhibits. The results are evaluated. (LCL)

  3. PURPA Resource Development in the Pacific Northwest : Case Studies of Ten Electricity Generating Powerplants.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Washington State Energy Office.

    1990-07-01

    The case studies in this document describe the Public Utilities, Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) development process for a variety of generating technologies. Developer interactions with regulatory agencies and power purchasers are described in some detail. Equipment, installation, and maintenance costs are identified; power marketing considerations are taken into account; and potential environmental impacts, with corresponding mitigation approaches and practices are summarized. The project development case studies were prepared by the energy agencies of the four Northwest states, under contract to the Bonneville Power Administration.

  4. Guidelines to assist rural electric cooperatives to fulfill the requirements of Sections 201 and 210 of PURPA for cogeneration and small power production

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1981-02-01

    These guidelines were designed to assist National Rural Electric Cooperative Association staff and consultants involved in the implementation of Sections 201 and 210 of the Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA). The guidelines were structured to meet anticipated use as: a self-contained legal, technical and economic reference manual helpful in dealing with small power producers and cogenerators; a roadmap through some of the less obvious obstacles encountered by utilities interacting with small power producers and cogenerators; a starting point for those utilities who have not yet formulated specific policies and procedures, nor developed rates for purchasing power from small power producers and cogenerators; a discussion vehicle to highlight key issues and increase understanding in workshop presentations to rural electric cooperatives; and an evolutionary tool which can be updated to reflect changes in the law as they occur. The chapters in these Guidelines contain both summary information, such as compliance checklists, and detailed information, such as cost rate calculations, on regulatory requirements, operational considerations, and rate considerations. The appendices contain more specific material, e.g. rural electric cooperative sample policy statements. (LCL)

  5. Discussion series on PURPA related topics

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Sturgeon, J I

    1980-08-01

    The US DOE sponsored 25 demonstration and implementation projects dealing with electric utility load management, metering, and billing. This volume deals with the procedures and equipment which are affected when time-of-usage (TOU) pricing is used as the basis for the billing process and with the reaction of customers to TOU billing. TOU billing required more equipment, special training for billing personnel, longer billing time, and up to twice the billing process cost as compared with traditional billing, but the time and cost factors should be reduced with experience. (LCL)

  6. 75 FR 181 - Notice of Determinations on the PURPA Standards Set Forth in the Energy Independence and Security...

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-01-04

    ... using a diverse resource portfolio. TVA and distributors already have many programs that encourage...). Leadership teams will recommend the optimal approach for smart grid. The teams will also coordinate...

  7. Techniques for analyzing the impacts of certain electric-utility ratemaking and regulatory-policy concepts. Regulatory laws and policies. [State by state

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    None

    1980-08-01

    This report is a legal study prepared to provide a review of the substantive and procedural laws of each regulatory jurisdiction that may affect implementation of the PURPA standards, and to summarize the current state of consideration and implementation of policies and rate designs similar or identical to the PURPA standards by state regulatory agencies and nonregulated utilities. This report is divided into three sections. The first section, the Introduction, summarizes the standards promulgated by PURPA and the results of the legal study. The second section, State Regulatory Law and Procedure, summarizes for each state or other ratemaking jurisdiction: (1) general constitutional and statutory provisions affecting utility rates and conditions of service; (2) specific laws or decisions affecting policy or rate design issues covered by PURPA standards; and (3) statutes and decisions governing administrative procedures, including judicial review. A chart showing actions taken on the policy and rate design issues addressed by PURPA is also included for each jurisdiction, and citations to relevant authorities are presented for each standard. State statutes or decisions that specifically define a state standard similar or identical to a PURPA standard, or that refer to one of the three PURPA objectives, are noted. The third section, Nonregulated Electric Utilities, summarizes information available on nonregulated utilities, i.e., publicly or cooperatively owned utilities which are specifically exempted from state regulation by state law.

  8. The outlook for wheeling

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Zimmer, M.J.

    1990-04-01

    There is a continued national interest in decentralized power sources involving cogeneration and independent power production. But while these issues are debated in the halls of Congress, and the subject of generic rulemaking debate before the FERC, the real action is occurring elsewhere. Key momentum is building in the states ad individual electric utility systems requiring Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and state commission review of discrete applications for case by case review. These reflect the pressure of competitive forces building within the industry from other electric utilities, power export marketeers, environmental and siting regulation, and from financial institutions. The underlying intent of PURPA is to encourage and provide incentives for the development of alternate energy sources to provide the efficient use of our nation's natural resources. Under PURPA the Commission can not direct an electric utility to provide transmission services. However, this power can only be exercised after a series of complex findings by the Commission through evidentiary hearings. In addition, PURPA amended other sections of the Federal Power Act to provide various rate incentives and exemptions for cogeneration and small power production facilities including the right for interconnection to the electric utility. The scope of such interconnection rights, and whether they might encompass broader transmission rights for QFs has yet to be tested. This paper describes wheeling rules prior to PURPA, the PURPA amendments governing wheeling; states' views; and the need for a review.

  9. Developing hydropower in Washington state. Volume 2: An electricity marketing manual

    Science.gov (United States)

    James, J. W.; McCoy, G. A.

    1982-03-01

    An electricity marketing manual for the potential small and micro-hydroelectric project developer within the state of Washington is presented. Public utility regulatory policies (PURPA) requires electric utilities to interconnect with and pay a rate based on their full avoided costs for the purchase of electrical output from qualifying small power production facilities. The determination of avoided costs, as business organizational considerations, utility interface concerns, interconnection requirements, metering options, and liability and wheeling are discussed. The utility responses are summarized, legislation which is of importance to hydropower developers and the powers and functions of the authorities responsible for enforcing the mandate of PURPA are described.

  10. Homemade Electricity: An Introduction to Small-Scale Wind, Hydro, and Photovoltaic Systems.

    Science.gov (United States)

    Smith, Diane

    This report consists of three parts. The first part provides advice (in the form of questions and answers) to prospective individual power producers who are considering investing in electricity-producing systems and in generating their own power. A list of Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) regulations is included. This legislation…

  11. 18 CFR 5.18 - Application content.

    Science.gov (United States)

    2010-04-01

    ... applicant seeks PURPA benefits: § 292.208 of this chapter. (b) Exhibit E—Environmental Exhibit. The... “Preparing Environmental Assessments: Guidelines for Applicants, Contractors, and Staff,” as they may be... reference point; describe the topography and climate; and discuss major land uses and economic activities...

  12. 77 FR 14011 - Rainbow Ranch Wind, LLC, Rainbow West Wind, LLC; Notice of Petition for Enforcement

    Science.gov (United States)

    2012-03-08

    ... Energy Regulatory Commission Rainbow Ranch Wind, LLC, Rainbow West Wind, LLC; Notice of Petition for... Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA), 16 USA 8242-3(h), Rainbow Ranch Wind, LLC (Rainbow Ranch) and Rainbow West Wind, LLC (Rainbow West) (collectively, Petitioners) filed a petition requesting the Federal...

  13. New developments in cogeneration: opening remarks

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Shuster, C.N.

    1982-06-01

    Cogeneration is defined as Total energy, that is, multiple use of a single source of energy. Dual utilization of radiation in an ancient bath in Pompeii is perhaps the earliest such use. Because of PURPA in 1978 development of small power production facilities and cogeneration is encouraged. A map shows the projected cogeneration facilities across the country in 1995.

  14. 78 FR 5798 - Grouse Creek Wind Park, LLC, Grouse Creek Wind Park II, LLC; Notice of Petition for Enforcement

    Science.gov (United States)

    2013-01-28

    ... From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Grouse Creek Wind Park, LLC, Grouse Creek Wind Park II, LLC; Notice of... Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA), Grouse Creek Wind Park, LLC and Grouse Creek Wind Park...

  15. Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978. Annual report to Congress

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    None,

    1980-05-01

    Titles I and III of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA) establish retail regulatory policies for electric and natural gas utilities, respectively, aimed at achieving three purposes: conservation of energy supplied by electric and gas utilities; efficiency in the use of facilities and resources by these utilities; equitable rates to electricity and natural gas consumers. PURPA also continues the pilot utility implementation program, authorized under Title II of the Energy Conservation and Production ACT (ECPA), to encourage adoption of cost-based rates and efficient energy-management practices. The purpose of this report is twofold: (1) to summarize and analyze the progress that state regulatory authorities and certain nonregulated utilities have made in their consideration of the PURPA standards; and (2) to summarize the Department of Energy (DOE) activities relating to PURPA and ECPA. The report provides a broad overview and assessment of the status of electric and gas regulation nationwide, and thus helps provide the basis for congressional and DOE actions targeted on the utility industry to address pressing national energy problems.

  16. Western Regional Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement: Rulemaking for Small Power Production and Cogeneration Facilities - Exemptions for Geothermal Facilities

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Heinemann, Jack M.; Nalder, Nan; Berger, Glen

    1981-02-01

    Section 643 of the Energy Security Act of 1980 directed the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to develop rules to further encourage geothermal development by Small Power Production Facilities. This rule amends rules previously established in Dockets No. RM79-54 and 55 under Section 201 and 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA). The analysis shows that the rules are expected to stimulate the development of up to 1,200 MW of capacity for electrical generation from geothermal facilities by 1995--1,110 MW more than predicted in the original PURPA EIS. This Final Supplemental EIS to the DEIS, issued by FERC in June 1980, forecasts likely near term development and analyzes environmental effects anticipated to occur due to development of geothermal resources in the Western United States as a result of this additional rulemaking.

  17. Policy Overview and Options for Maximizing the Role of Policy in Geothermal Electricity Development

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Doris, E.; Kreycik, C.; Young, K.

    2009-09-01

    Geothermal electricity production capacity has grown over time because of multiple factors, including its renewable, baseload, and domestic attributes; volatile and high prices for competing technologies; and policy intervention. Overarching federal policies, namely the Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA), provided certainty to project investors in the 1980s, leading to a boom in geothermal development. In addition to market expansion through PURPA, research and development policies provided an investment of public dollars toward developing technologies and reducing costs over time to increase the market competitiveness of geothermal electricity. Together, these efforts are cited as the primary policy drivers for the currently installed capacity. Informing policy decisions depends on the combined impacts of policies at the federal and state level on geothermal development. Identifying high-impact suites of policies for different contexts, and the government levels best equipped to implement them, would provide a wealth of information to both policy makers and project developers.

  18. Rules implementing Sections 201 and 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978: a regulatory history

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Danziger, R.N.; Caples, P.W.; Huning, J.R.

    1980-09-15

    An analysis is made of the rules implementing Sections 201 and 210 of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA). The act provides that utilities must purchase power from qualifying producers of electricity at nondiscriminatory rates, and it exempts private generators from virtually all state and Federal utility regulations. Most of the analysis presented is taken from the perspective of photovoltaics (PV) and solar thermal electric point-focusing distributed receivers (pfdr). It is felt, however, that the analysis is applicable both to cogeneration and other emerging technologies. Chapters presented are: The FERC Response to Oral Comments on the Proposed Rules Implementing Sections 201 and 210 of PURPA; Additional Changes Made or Not Made That Were Addressed in Other Than Oral Testimony; View on the Proposed Rules Implementing Sections 201 and 210 of PURPA; Response to Comments on the Proposed 201 and 210 Rules; and Summary Analysis of the Environmental Assessment of the Rules. Pertinent reference material is provided in the Appendices, including the text of the rules. (MCW)

  19. Solar-parabolic dish-Stirling-engine-system module. Task 1: Topical report, market assessment/conceptual design

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1982-11-30

    The major activities reported are: a market study to identify an early market for a dish-Stirling module and assess its commercial potential; preparation of a conceptual system and subsystem design to address this market; and preparation of an early sales implementation plan. A study of the reliability of protection from the effects of walk-off, wherein the sun's image leaves the receiver if the dish is not tracking, is appended, along with an optical analysis and structural analysis. Also appended are the relationship between PURPA and solar thermal energy development and electric utility pricing rationale. (LEW)

  20. Quarterly project status report, January-March 1981

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1981-01-01

    The Department of Energy's (DOE), Economic Regualtory Administration (ERA), Office of Utility Systems (OUS), Division of Rates and Energy Management (DREM), stated a requirement to report to Congress on determinations made by State regulatory authorities and nonregulated utilities regarding purposes of Titles I and III of the Public Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) of 1978. Progress in providing support to ERA by assisting technically and administratively in implementing ERA's information data base to their user audience is reported. The activities in this program are related to: information acquisition/dissemination; information analysis and retrieval; information storage; and information maintenance.

  1. Solar-parabolic dish-Stirling-engine-system module. Task 1: Topical report, market assessment/conceptual design

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1982-11-30

    The major activities reported are: a market study to identify an early market for a dish-Stirling module and assess its commercial potential; preparation of a conceptual system and subsystem design to address this market; and preparation of an early sales implementation plan. A study of the reliability of protection from the effects of walk-off, wherein the sun's image leaves the receiver if the dish is not tracking, is appended, along with an optical analysis and structural analysis. Also appended are the relationship between PURPA and solar thermal energy development and electric utility pricing rationale. (LEW)

  2. From monopoly to competition

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Carpentier, J-M.

    1997-12-31

    For nearly a century, electric utilities have been vertically integrated, having control over power generation, distribution and transmission. They virtually monopolized the markets which they served. In 1977, during the energy crisis, the electric utilities were challenged with the establishment of the US Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and in 1978 by the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA). This independent agency, which was initially set up to promote new energy sources and cogeneration, was also a major player in regulating electric power transmission and wholesale trade. PURPA required that electric utilities buy their electricity from qualifying independent power producers. In 1996, FERC orders 888 and 889 were issued which opened up competition to a large degree. Traditional utilities were forced to unbundle their generating and transmission costs. Order 889 opened up information systems to show available transmission capacity on power grids. By setting up a division to take charge of its power transmission system, Hydro-Quebec hopes to gain full access to transmission setups and the wholesale electricity market in the US. 1 fig.

  3. Innovative Rates Program. Final report

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    1982-06-21

    Title II of the Energy Conservation and Production Act (ECPA) as amended by the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) provided financial assistance to state utility regulatory commissions, nonregulated electric utilities, and the Tennessee Valley Authority through the Innovative Rates Program. The financial assistance was to be used to plan or carry out electric utility regulatory rate reform initiatives relating to innovative rate structures that encourage conservation of energy, electric utility efficiency and reduced costs, and equitable rates to consumers. The Federal and local objectives of the project are described. Activities planned and accomplishments are summarized for the following: project management, data collection, utility bill evaluation, billing enclosure/mailing evaluation, media program evaluation, display evaluation, rate study sessions evaluation, speakers bureau evaluation, and individual customer contacts. A timetable/milestone chart and financial information are included. (MHR)

  4. Open transmission access

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Williams, J.W. [Edison Electric Inst., Washington, DC (United States)

    1996-05-01

    Congress has been stunned by the speed of change in the electric power industry since the enactment of the 1992 Energy Policy Act (EPAct), and the electric utility industry is well on the road toward the development of competitive bulk power markets that will more efficiently and effectively serve the needs of the nation`s electric customers. Former Congressman Phil Sharp indicated to EEI, ``Congress did not anticipate the speed at which change would occur or be accepted.`` Edison Electric Institute`s (EEI) position is that the goal of the industry should be efficient competition. This is competition on a level playing field without public power subsidies, the Public Utility Holding Company Act (PUHCA) or the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) obligations. It means competition at the marginal cost of delivering electric energy.

  5. Feasibility of a small central cogenerated energy facility: Energy management memorandum

    Science.gov (United States)

    Porter, R. N.

    1982-10-01

    The thermal economic feasibility of a small cogenerated energy facility designed to serve several industries in the Stockyards area was investigated. Cogeneration options included two dual fuel diesels and two gas turbines, all with waste heat boilers, and five fired boilers. Fuels included natural gas, and for the fired boiler cases, also low sulphur coal and municipal refuse. For coal and refuse, the option of steam only without cogeneration was also assessed. The fired boiler cogeneration systems employed back pressure steam turbines. The refuse fired cases utilized electrical capacities, 8500 to 52,400 lbm/hr and 0 to 9.9 MW (e), respectively. Deficient steam was assumed generated independently in existing equipment. Excess electrical power over that which was displaced was sold to Commonwealth Edison Company under PURPA (Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act). The facility was operated by a mutually owned corporation formed by the cogenerated power users.

  6. Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978: Natural Gas Rate Design Study

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    None,

    1980-05-01

    The report concludes that, to effectively deal with our national energy problems, gas rate structures should be designed to reflect the costs which the nation avoids if gas is efficiently used and substituted for oil. Current pipeline and distribution company rate structures generally do not meet this test. Although gas is a substitute for oil in many applications, and conserved gas can reduce oil imports, gas rate structures often fail to convey to consumers the fact that, from a national perspective, gas is as valuable as oil. The provisions of the Natural Gas Policy Act of 1978 (NGPA) take a strong first step in correcting these problems. But, as clearly recognized in both NGPA and PURPA, these provisions need to be supplemented by updating pipeline and distribution company rate designs to address the problems of the 1980's - rather than the problems of the 1950's. In this regard, NGPA mandates incremental pricing, which raises the average price of gas to certain industrial users only. The Department of Energy (DOE) study suggests an alternate approach: pipeline and distribution rate structures that reflect in their tailblocks, for all customer classes, the economic costs of gas usage. Such rates would convey to all users the costs incurred by the nation as a consequence of their decisions to use or conserve gas. Such rate structures should promote the three purposes of PURPA - end-use conservation, efficient use of utility resources, and equitable rates - to a greater extent than do traditional accounting cost rate designs, which reflect decisions made in the distant past.

  7. Feasibility of a medium-size central cogenerated energy facility, energy management memorandum

    Science.gov (United States)

    Porter, R. W.

    1982-09-01

    The thermal-economic feasibility was studied of a medium-size central cogenerated energy facility designed to serve five varied industries. Generation options included one dual-fuel diesel and one gas turbine, both with waste heat boilers, and five fired boilers. Fuels included natural gas, and for the fired-boiler cases, also low-sulphur coal and municipal refuse. The fired-boiler cogeneration systems employed back-pressure steam turbines. For coal and refuse, the option of steam only without cogeneration was also assessed. The refuse-fired cases utilized modular incinerators. The options provided for a wide range of steam and electrical capacities. Deficient steam was assumed generated independently in existing equipment. Excess electrical power over that which could be displaced was assumed sold to Commonwealth Edison Company under PURPA (Public Utility Regulator Policies Act). The facility was assumed operated by a mutually owned corporation formed by the cogenerated power users. The economic analysis was predicted on currently applicable energy-investment tax credits and accelerated depreciation for a January 1985 startup date. Based on 100% equity financing, the results indicated that the best alternative was the modular-incinerator cogeneration system.

  8. Techniques for analyzing the impacts of certain electric-utility ratemaking and regulatory-policy concepts. Glossary

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    None

    1980-08-01

    This document, Glossary, is the first in a series of reports to identify, describe, and apply techniques for analyzing the impacts of certain electric utility concepts. This report was developed with a focus on the currently evolving issues of ratemaking, especially as they might be expected to arise under Sections 101, 111, 113, 114, 131, 132, and 210 of the P.U.R.P.A. of 1978. Because the evolutionary process of ratemaking has led to multiple proceedings and changes of inference in some terms, the glossary attempts to delineate these changes where appropriate. Definitions not uniquely related to ratemaking are included if they are likely to be used in ratemaking proceedings. To avoid unnecessary duplication of effort and expense, the compilers relied heavily on previously developed, publicly available glossaries and definitions developed by organizations such as Edison Electric Institute, the Electric Power Research Institute, and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers. Existing definitions were revised and new ones were developed as appropriate.

  9. And deregulation shall lead me to lie down in green pastures

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Weidinger, G.

    1995-06-01

    This presentation briefly reviews the history of the IPP industry, the current state of competition, and potential opportunities for IPPs in a deregulated environment. Since the beginning of the PURPA created IPP industry, we have experienced many market phases. These began with {open_quotes}beat avoided cost,{close_quotes} followed by {open_quotes}find a need and fill it,{close_quotes} followed by {open_quotes}the bid fest,{close_quotes} to today`s {open_quotes}anything goes.{close_quotes} During this time, market clearing prices have declined from over 80/KwHr to 2-40/KwHr. Today`s partially deregulated electric market includes fierce competition and several new players in the game. Where surplus capacity exists, IPPs must compete with subsidized power. Long-term contracts are no longer widely available. Access to markets is constrained by less than open transmission. Even with these challenges, opportunities remain for the IPP supplier. Opportunities for advanced coal-fired power systems will be explored.

  10. Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978: Natural Gas Rate Design Study

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    None

    1980-05-01

    First, the comments on May 3, 1979 Notice of Inquiry of DOE relating to the Gas Utility Rate Design Study Required by Section 306 of PURPA are presented. Then, comments on the following are included: (1) ICF Gas Utility Model, Gas Utility Model Data Outputs, Scenario Design; (2) Interim Model Development Report with Example Case Illustrations; (3) Interim Report on Simulation of Seven Rate Forms; (4) Methodology for Assessing the Impacts of Alternative Rate Designs on Industrial Energy Use; (5) Simulation of Marginal-Cost-Based Natural Gas Rates; and (6) Preliminary Discussion Draft of the Gas Rate Design Study. Among the most frequent comments expressed were the following: (a) the public should be given the opportunity to review the final report prior to its submission to Congress; (b) results based on a single computer model of only four hypothetical utility situations cannot be used for policy-making purposes for individual companies or the entire gas industry; (c) there has been an unobjective treatment of traditional and economic cost rate structures; the practical difficulties and potential detrimental consequences of economic cost rates are not fully disclosed; and (d) it is erroneous to assume that end users, particularly residential customers, are influenced by price signals in the rate structure, as opposed to the total bill.

  11. Meeting the Northwest's Energy Needs Through Competitive Bidding.

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    McCoy, Gilbert A.; Bloomquist, R. Gordon

    1990-07-01

    Utilities have traditionally met load growth requirements through building projects (self-build), purchasing power from other utilities, or from running conservation programs. During the 1980s, alternative capacity expansion approaches were developed. Resources are now also obtained through PURPA-based or competitive bidding acquisition programs. Self-build programs typically involve large-scale hydropower; coal-, natural gas-, and oil-fired projects; and nuclear thermal electric generating projects. Characteristics of these projects, in addition to size, include long lead times, capital intensiveness, substantial environmental impacts, and a significant risk of cost overruns. The risk element became immediately apparent to those investor-owned utilities that, because of decreased load growth, had thermal project investments disallowed in rate cases or were forced to terminate projects. Phrases such as prudent investment,'' used and useful,'' and least-cost planning'' became familiar to the utility industry. Many utilities, once burned, subsequently adopted a policy of never again constructing a base-loaded generating plant. 2 figs.

  12. Economics of industrial cogeneration with a residual-oil-fired low-speed diesel

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Santini, D.J.; Belak, F.J.; Bernard, M.J.; Stodolsky, F.; Suchy, K.W.

    1984-01-01

    The only residual-oil-fired low speed diesel cogeneration facility in the US has been in operation for a year at the Hoffman-LaRoche Vitamin C plant in Belvidere, NJ. Operating data for this grid-connected 23 MW facility are used to construct a generic evaluation of the economic desirability of such systems for industrial electric/thermal applications and industrial-thermal/commercial-electrical applications made possible by recent US legislation (PURPA). The post 1980 changes in relative electrical and residual oil prices are shown to have made oil fired on-site generation more attractive. The likely 1985-2005 movements of electricity and residual oil prices are discussed, along with risks of error in projections. The system is evaluated as a whole and on an incremental basis. Incremental analysis includes (1) the economics of steam and hot water use given the diesel and (2) the economics of system generation given industrial electric, steam and hot water loads. The sensitivity of the economics of the system to the full range of US electricity and residual oil prices is estimated. The effect of variation in system loads is examined. The economic desirability of the system is often great but is also highly variable geographically, largely as a function of local evaded electricity charges.

  13. Small-scale biomass fueled cogeneration systems - A guidebook for general audiences

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Wiltsee, G.

    1993-12-01

    What is cogeneration and how does it reduce costs? Cogeneration is the production of power -- and useful heat -- from the same fuel. In a typical biomass-fueled cogeneration plant, a steam turbine drives a generator, producing electricity. The plant uses steam from the turbine for heating, drying, or other uses. The benefits of cogeneration can mostly easily be seen through actual samples. For example, cogeneration fits well with the operation of sawmills. Sawmills can produce more steam from their waste wood than they need for drying lumber. Wood waste is a disposal problem unless the sawmill converts it to energy. The case studies in Section 8 illustrate some pluses and minuses of cogeneration. The electricity from the cogeneration plant can do more than meet the in-house requirements of the mill or manufacturing plant. PURPA -- the Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 -- allows a cogenerator to sell power to a utility and make money on the excess power it produces. It requires the utility to buy the power at a fair price -- the utility`s {open_quotes}avoided cost.{close_quotes} This can help make operation of a cogeneration plant practical.

  14. Renewable Energy Prices in State-Level Feed-in Tariffs: Federal Law Constraints and Possible Solutions

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Hempling, S.; Elefant, C.; Cory, K.; Porter, K.

    2010-01-01

    State legislatures and state utility commissions trying to attract renewable energy projects are considering feed-in tariffs, which obligate retail utilities to purchase electricity from renewable producers under standard arrangements specifying prices, terms, and conditions. The use of feed-in tariffs simplifies the purchase process, provides revenue certainty to generators, and reduces the cost of financing generating projects. However, some argue that federal law--including the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA) and the Federal Power Act of 1935 (FPA)--constrain state-level feed-in tariffs. This report seeks to reduce the legal uncertainties for states contemplating feed-in tariffs by explaining the constraints imposed by federal statutes. It describes the federal constraints, identifies transaction categories that are free of those constraints, and offers ways for state and federal policymakers to interpret or modify existing law to remove or reduce these constraints. This report proposes ways to revise these federal statutes. It creates a broad working definition of a state-level feed-in tariff. Given this definition, this report concludes there are paths to non-preempted, state-level feed-in tariffs under current federal law.

  15. The difficult relations between American electricity producers and distributors and their suppliers; Les relations difficiles des producteurs et distributeurs d`electricite` americains avec leurs fournisseurs

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Clade`, J.; Fouque, T. [Electricite de France (EDF), 75 - Paris (France)

    1995-12-01

    This article is a new sight about the relations between customers and suppliers in the history of the American electrical power industry. From the outset this industry became very quickly concentrated or both equipment suppliers and electricity utilities. Industrial firms operating on the world`s biggest market the United States were able to rapidly increase the size of their production and distribution plant due to the technological progress made. Besides there were close links at first between suppliers and customers in order that to limit financial and technical risks. The balance between large utilities and supplies existing until the First World War was broken particularly after 1935 when the political authorities began to regulate the activity of the utilities in order to avoid any abuse of the dominant position against the end consumer. This regulation led to a lasting imbalance of the equipment market, with a reduction of the negotiating power of buyers compared with the suppliers. In the 1960s and the 1970s, and above all after the 1974 crisis, the electricity consumption in the United States stopped the increase quickly and the race towards giantism was suspended. Technological changes occurred (e.a. the development of the gas turbine), which contributed to the redistribution of roles. During this crisis there was a gradual rebalancing of relationship between suppliers and customers, this rebalancing being facilitated by the administration through measures such as the creation of EPRI and PURPA act. This change took place in a new international context, due to the development of world-wide scale European and Japanese offerers, able to competing efficiently with American suppliers. American electricity companies and, then, manufactures were weakened by this new competition.

  16. A business case for on-site generation: The BD biosciences pharmingen project

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Firestone, Ryan; Creighton, Charles; Bailey, Owen; Marnay, Chris; Stadler, Michael

    2003-09-01

    Deregulation is haltingly changing the United States electricity markets. The resulting uncertainty and/or rising energy costs can be hedged by generating electricity on-site and other benefits, such as use of otherwise wasted heat, can be captured. The Public Utility Regulatory Policy Act (PURPA) of 1978 first invited relatively small-scale generators ({ge} 1 MW) into the electricity market. The advent of efficient and reliable small scale and renewable equipment has spurred an industry that has, in recent years, made even smaller (business scale) electricity generation an economically viable option for some consumers. On-site energy capture and/or conversion, known as distributed energy resources (DER), offers consumers many benefits, such as economic savings and price predictability, improved reliability, control over power quality, and emissions reductions. Despite these benefits, DER adoption can be a daunting move to a customer accustomed to simply paying a monthly utility bill. San Diego is in many ways an attractive location for DER development: It has high electricity prices typical of California and a moderate climate i.e. energy loads are consistent throughout the year. Additionally, the price shock to San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) customers during the summer of 2000 has interested many in alternatives to electricity price vulnerability. This report examines the business case for DER at the San Diego biotechnology supply company, BD Biosciences Pharmingen, which considered DER for a building with 200-300 kW base-load, much of which accommodates the refrigerators required to maintain chemicals. Because of the Mediterranean climate of the San Diego area and the high rate of air changes required due to on-site use of chemicals, modest space heating is required throughout the year. Employees work in the building during normal weekday business hours, and daily peak loads are typically about 500 kW.

  17. Who Owns Renewable Energy Certificates?

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Holt, Edward; Wiser, Ryan; Bolinger, Mark

    2006-06-01

    Renewable energy certificates (RECs) are tradable instruments that convey the attributes of a renewable energy generator and the right to make certain claims about energy purchases. RECs first appeared in US markets in the late 1990s and are particularly important in states that accept or require them as evidence of compliance with renewables portfolio standards (RPS). The emergence of RECs as a tradable commodity has made utilities, generators, and regulators increasingly aware of the need to specify who owns the RECs in energy transactions. In voluntary transactions, most agree that the question of REC ownership can and should be negotiated privately between the buyer and the seller, and should be clearly established by contract. Claims about purchasing or using renewable energy should only be made if REC ownership can be documented. In many other cases, however, renewable energy transactions are either mandated or encouraged through state or federal policy. Because of the recent appearance of RECs, legislation and regulation mandating the purchase of renewable energy has sometimes been silent on the disposition of the RECs associated with that generation. Furthermore, some renewable energy contracts pre-date the existence of RECs, and therefore do not address REC ownership. In both of these instances, the issue of REC ownership must often be answered by legislative or regulatory authorities. The resulting uncertainty in REC ownership has hindered the development of robust REC markets and has, in some cases, led to contention between buyers and sellers of renewable generation. This article, which is based on a longer Berkeley Lab report, reviews federal and state efforts to clarify the ownership of RECs from Qualifying Facilities (QFs) that sell their generation under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) of 1978. The full report also addresses state efforts to clarify REC ownership in two other situations, customer-owned generation that benefits

  18. Who Owns Renewable Energy Certificates? An Exploration of PolicyOptions and Practice

    Energy Technology Data Exchange (ETDEWEB)

    Holt, Edward A.; Wiser, Ryan; Bolinger, Mark

    2006-04-05

    ownership must often be answered by legislative or regulatory authorities. Some renewable energy contracts pre-date the existence of RECs, however, and in these cases the disposition of RECs is often unclear. Similarly, because of the recent appearance of RECs, legislation and regulation mandating the purchase of renewable energy has sometimes been silent on the disposition of the RECs associated with that generation. The resulting uncertainty in REC ownership has hindered the development of robust REC markets and has, in some cases, led to contention between buyers and sellers of renewable generation. The purpose of this report is to provide information and insight to state policy-makers, utility regulators, and others about different approaches to clarifying the ownership of RECs. We focus exclusively on three distinct areas in which REC ownership issues have arisen: (1) Qualifying Facilities (QFs) that sell their generation under the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) of 1978; (2) Customer-owned generation that benefits from state net metering rules; and (3) Generation facilities that receive financial incentives from state or utility funds. This is a survey report. It reviews how both the federal government and states have addressed these issues to date, and highlights the arguments that have been raised for different REC ownership dispositions. Our aim is to describe the arguments on each side, and the context for the debates that are occurring. We do not, in this report, provide a list of policy recommendations for how policymakers should be addressing these issues.