Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Bob's avatar

The same crap goes on at the PUCs: Biased advocacy studies that selectively ignore costs and exaggerate benefits of their NetZero dreams. A few examples to be aware of:

1) They take credit for suppression of the generation market prices when demand is reduced (known as DRIPE) for energy conservation or solar but don't even consider the effect of load increases on the market at the most expensive time of the year due to heat pumps.

2) They have recently Issued reduced t and d rates* for heat pumps in Massachusetts based on lower marginal costs for transmission and distribution, but ignore the much much higher marginal cost increase in generation costs for heating load added in the winter months that cost 2-4 times the other months. See MA 25-08 docket.

3) They advocate Time of Use rates so that customers pay the cost of service so that they switch time of consumption ( good idea in theory), but then back off the high peak rates when they realize that loads such as heating can't be shifted and the customer bill will skyrocket. Reduced peak rates lower than costs shift costs to non heat pump customers.

4) They talk about reducing costs with offshore wind but their cost analysis doesn't assign the capital costs to the peak load as it should. Instead off peak non-heating customers subsidize the the heat pump customers. It also doesn't address dunkelflaute during 3+ day cold spells.

5) They analyze to assure the solar net-metering customer gets a 9-11% rate of return but never discuss the cost that the solar customer imposes on the non-solar customer. The solar rate of return is achieved primarily by the solar customer not paying for any rate increase over the next 20 years.....even the increases the solar customers cause. I call this Chutzpah Regulation.

* They also ignore that heat pump load will soon impose large marginal T and D costs when the grids become winter peaking in the early 2030s.

6) They promote heat pumps with a $450M Heat Pump Accelerator program that will increase generation costs 53% for everyone. They fail to inform heat pump customers that winter electricity costs 2+ times the subsidized they are presently paying there by driving higher prices for all.

Etc, etc....

Jeff Chestnut's avatar

Yes - publish to get your desired impact then retract the publication and leave the impacts lingering. The very example of tge definition of discredited if there ever was one. But 99% of junk paper authors agree they do not want to be defunded. Recognize them for what they are - charlatans,

2 more comments...

No posts

Ready for more?