The Worlds #1 Renewable Energy Network for News & Information
Sign In or Register
Renewable Energy World Logo
Monday, May 20, 2013
  • Sections
    • Home
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Solar
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Wind
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Geothermal
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Bio
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Hydro
      • News
      • Opinion & Commentary
      • Featured Blogs
      • Research & Reports
      • Video
      • Press Releases
      • All Blogs
      • Events
      • Products
      • Finance
    • Careers
    • Companies
      • Company Directory
      • Press Releases
      • Products
      • Events Calendar
      • White Papers
    • Webcasts
      • All Webcasts
      • Featured Webcasts
      • Upcoming Webcasts
      • Archived Webcasts
      • Events Calendar
    • White Papers
    • Magazines
      • Renewable Energy World
      • Wind Technology
      • Large Scale Solar
      • Hydro Review
      • HRW - Hydro Review Worldwide
      • Renewable Energy World (North America Edition)
      • Photovoltaics World
    • Awards
  • Account
    • Sign In
    • Register
  • Search

Idaho Utility and Wind Power Generators Still Battling Over Wind Energy Curtailment

Marsha W. Johnston, Contributor
September 28, 2012  |  15 Comments

Idaho Power says it will appeal the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC) rejection last week of its proposal to the Idaho Public Utilities Commission that would allow it to curtail certain of its existing wind power PPAs in conditions of low network load.

“FERC’s order is contrary to the public interest of the citizens of the State of Idaho, and harmful to Idaho Power’s customers.  The order addresses open issues that are before the Idaho Public Utilities Commission for determination.  The company is preparing to challenge the order as part of our commitment to providing safe, reliable, and fair-priced electricity and service to our customers,” said Idaho Power spokesman Brad Bowlin, in a statement.

In proposing its “Schedule 74” tariff to the Idaho regulator, Idaho Power contended that Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) should allow them to halt the otherwise contractually required electricity purchases during periods of light load, such as during the night in the spring and fall. The utility said the requirement to buy from wind farms even during times of light demand forces them to back down other energy generators like coal-fired plants to balance the power system, and that bringing the other systems back up when demand increases costs the utility more — and those costs are passed on to consumers.

During initial technical hearings with the state regulator, commission staffers testified that such curtailment during times of light load is allowable under commission rules and under precedent-setting decisions made in similar cases. Thus, the state’s wind operators, including Idaho Wind Partners 1, fearing an unfavorable decision, appealed to FERC without waiting for the Idaho Commission to rule, saying that such curtailment was possible only in emergency situations. FERC ruled despite state regulator officials argument to FERC officers that the matter simply wasn’t ripe for federal review.

The state Commission is still expected to rule on “Schedule 74” and other matters related to the Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) some time in October.  Randy Lobb, staff director for the Idaho Commission, said it would obviously have to take the FERC decision into consideration. He added "it’s possible that the commission would have rejected Schedule 74 even without the FERC ruling."

Idaho Power’s Bowlin asserted that the proposed curtailment schedule would only be used in “very limited circumstances”, as the utility’s Load Serving Operations Director Tess Park testified during the technical hearing on the open PURPA case before the IPUC. “And it’s important to note that `curtailment’ doesn’t mean completely shutting off a particular resource; it means limiting the output,” he said.

Regardless, said Lobb, one of the things that was never clear at the technical hearings was just how often curtailment would happen if Schedule 74 were approved. Although at one point Idaho Power said it could be up to a maximum of 5% of hours per year, Lobb acknowledged that was likely a “just a forecast of what could happen if all of its wind farms came online with high production during a low load period.” Any curtailment decision always depends on many factors, he said, adding, however, that cutting back 5% of wind hours per year would be “quite large. It has never been interrupted to that degree to date.”

The utility insists that is has no anti-wind agenda. “It’s important to understand that Idaho Power is not against wind energy. In fact, the first major wind project to come onto our Idaho Power’s system, the Elkhorn Valley Wind Farm, was initiated by Idaho Power.  But in the span of a few short years, more than 600 megawatts of wind power has been added to our system. As such, we are well positioned to speak to wind’s attributes and its shortcomings…wind’s erratic nature demands that other resources be in place to ensure the reliability of the power grid.  At Idaho Power, we advocate for any and all generation resources that are reliable and fair-priced. Currently, wind power doesn’t meet those criteria,” the company said in a statement issued to REW.com

The Idaho PUC is expected to rule on several other PURPA issues, including PPA contract length, the precision of prices paid for capacity and energy, liquidated damages, and the issues surrounding non-performance.  The latter item, Lobb noted, was highlighted in July, when Idaho Power set an all-time system peak load power of approximately 3250 MWh. “Of their 440 MW of wind online, only 14 MW was actually supplying. They’re paying for capacity, but they’re not getting it,” he said.

Indeed, paying too much for renewables was the Idaho Power’s primary argument for curtailment, saying that the non-negotiated rates it is required to employ are as much as $65 per MWh, compared to $5 per MWh for hydroelectric.  “One of our problems [with renewable energy] in Idaho is low [energy] prices and lack of need. It means that we can’t continue to add resources indefinitely, and we have added a lot in the last few years,” Lobb said.

Lead image: Huge plume over the mountains as the wind kicks up in central Idaho via Shutterstock.

15 Comments

Register To Comment
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
February 10, 2013
Alot of times it takes too long to create your first watt through nuclear due to public opposition. By the time you rally and campaign and win approval, wind would already have multiple GW's installed running, paid for and re-invested with next-generation designs going into even shorter payback periods with a well lubed supply chain. The high subsidy speeds up the learning curve to decreasing costs and increasing reliability as well. Solar went through a similar transformation because of the same reason but also experienced unfair trade practices. Therefore, monitoring of trade practices needs to be more stringent.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
February 10, 2013
The BPA created by congress is part of the DOE and is now self-funded. It was paid for 100% by our government.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
February 9, 2013
There are supposehd to be limits on foreign ownership here just as there is in other countries. But I do have concern of 3rd party ownership which increases a stake beyond 50%. However, the CIA is the one who keeps an eye on such activity. We have corporations in other countries and would scream bloody murder if they were booted out. So while there is an economic war going on. Allow their investors to spend money here and see how they fatten the pockets of the workforce to the same degree that we do over there. Actually, I'd probably like it better if it was at least 51% local municipal owned with strong ties to local unions.
Sherry Hellmuth
Sherry Hellmuth
February 6, 2013
@garyrich
The bpa isn't subsidized nearly to the extent of the foreign wind companies. Fifty+ times the subsidy per MWH is a ridiculous amount for the American taxpayer to be giving to these wind companies--they are foreign owned, and the $12 billion extension goes right out the door--not to mention that it's all borrowed money from the chinese that must be repaid by my children and grandchildren. Wind is a joke, it is not reliable or economically feasible. Nuclear will be the future.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
February 6, 2013
@Sherry-hellmuth
The Bonneville Power Administration wouldn't be where it is today without government help. Yet here it is providing some of the cheapest power in the country. In addition, all the CO2 created from the steel and concrete that went into it has been more than offset by it's production. Wind power can experience the same ongoing return on resources after offsetting costs and CO2 footprints. Not to mention the ability to add future stability to our water infrastructure with low overhead.
Sherry Hellmuth
Sherry Hellmuth
October 5, 2012
robhilbun I said stop taking my money for inefficient, unreliable, riduculous methods of generating power. If it's such a good thing, the rational inestor in the free market will make it work. You people who are oh-so-concerned about the environment always fail to consider the abbhorrent pollution in China to extract the ton of rare earth minerals required by each turbine, the raw air and water pollution produced by the manufacture of all the steel and cement that is never offset; and don;t forget the almost 1000 gallons of oil and other hazardous chemicals needed by each and every turbine-- neverthless--keep the taxpayers out of it and you invest if you want it.
Robert Hilbun
Robert Hilbun
October 4, 2012
Oh ok ok, lets not do anything, Sherry. Hey stop all alternative energy. Yeah maybe we can make laws to stop it. Why fund clean renewable energy.(boondoggles) The boondoggle is hydro for one. What's the true cost of losing all the fish stocks that brought all the ocean nutrients up into the mountains and fertalized all the forest and fed tons of large mammals and birds, insects and who even knows what all the evironmental benefits were. Now what do we have left( weaken forest that can't even take a little drought or fire). If you level out the true costs, the environmental and health related costs, etc. of all energy technologies, solar and wind probably are cost efficient even now. Solar for sure will get cheaper in the future as it has done year after year. Tell me how much fracking is really going to cost, millions of gallons of contaminated water for each well.
Sherry Hellmuth
Sherry Hellmuth
October 4, 2012
Way to go Idaho--stop this nonsense of renewable portfolio standards with the Feds forcing the states to go against the economic interests of the citizens. STOP THE PTC AND THIS JOKE OF WIND WILL END! No rational investor will pony up money for wind because it's not profitable (nor efficient to meet consumer needs). Quit breaking the back of the American taxpayer and jacking up their electricity costs just to support this boondoggle.
Gerry Wootton
Gerry Wootton
October 4, 2012
'This always puts us back at the storage factor and how to do it economically' ... not again! In Idaho, wind power is still a small fraction of generating capacity. Other system operators are managing at least 5 times as much wind capacity in their systems with few issues. The problem here is primarily a commercial issue.
The simple question to ask is which varies more - supply or demand: until it's the former, dispatching not storage is the issue.
If one wants to buffer the system, storage of demand makes as much sense as storage of capacity - moreso if demand side storage is replenished during low direct demand when transmission systems otherwise operate very inefficiently. Of course, utilities might not like that either as it would take money out of their pocket. Recall that utility operators fostered the development of appliances such as the toaster in order to increase their daytime demand. They could use schemes as simple as demand management but there is negative money in that.
Robert Hilbun
Robert Hilbun
October 4, 2012
This always puts us back at the storage factor and how to do it economically ..... with all this hydro around why not just pump water with the extra wind energy back into the hydro system?
Chris Kapsambelis
Chris Kapsambelis
October 3, 2012
This is the Achilles heel of wind power. What to do with the energy from strong winds during low demand? Cycling fossil fuel plants negates all the benefits of carbon avoidance, and curtailing wind destroys the economics of wind energy.

The usual solution is to pay wind farms for the curtailed energy. Everyone is happy except the ratepayer who is forced to pay for energy not generated.
Gerry Wootton
Gerry Wootton
October 3, 2012
This issue raises some interesting arguments not specific to Idaho.
First the defacto system operator uses periods of low demand to justify curtailment during peak demand.
Second the utility owns huge amounts of hydroelectric generation - they can cook the books to make their internal cost for hydroelectric power have any price they like. Also, when a utility owns a lot of generating capacity (in this case 3.3 GW of hydro, coal,NG and diesel) sufficient to meet 120% of local consumption; this gives them a need to find market while putting them in a position to apportion the energy market to their advantage over other producers.
Third, the utility exports substantial amounts of energy - watch carefully to see if the demand they're talking about is local demand or even just demand within their own distribution areas or total demand. Interestingly, in this case they own quite a lot of coal power but report as if most of it is for export making the local portfolio look greener.
Fourth - power generation from wind power in Idaho tripled in very short time. Any time new capacity ramps, the result is almost always teething problems and stranded capacity. This is pervasive - there seems to be virtually no power markets and no system operators that can plan effectively. This is not uniquely a wind power issue.
David Carl
David Carl
October 3, 2012
$65 a MWH for wind is 6.5 cents per KWH. That number seems to be correct. The $5 a MWH for hydroelectric sems to be only achievable if the construction costs of the facility has been fully depreciated, leaving only the actual operating cost. Since many dams were built during the depression this is possible. In 30 years the wind power may match the low hydroelectric cost.
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
October 1, 2012
My other question, is wind at $65 per MWh still cheaper than diesel?
If the price is lower, then switching to battery powered transit would save taxpayers in the long run.
Perhaps, there are other matters preventing the replacement of fossil fuels...
For instance, the monopoly of lithium sources and production create too much economic risk...
Gary Richardson
Gary Richardson
October 1, 2012
The pacific northwest is ripe for electric vehicles, hybrid plug-ins and electric storage that can be used to offset low load conditions. It is just a matter of implementing a smart grid backbone with economic incentives.
However, I'm surprised of the price difference per MWh between wind and hydro.
Is this price difference a typo?

Add Your Comments

To add your comments you must sign-in or create a free account.

  • Create a Free Account!
  • Sign-In
Marsha Johnston

Marsha Johnston

Marsha W. Johnston is a freelance writer based in the DC area, specializing in all areas of sustainable development, from renewable energy to agriculture and wildlife conservation.
  • About
  • Articles
  • Contact
  • FOLLOW
  • CONTACT
Stay Connected
         
To register for our free e-Newsletters, create your free account here:

Editors' Picks

  • EU Debate Over Climate Change Policy Could Dampen Renewable Energy Growth
  • Wind Power — Even without the Wind

Most Commented

  • 17
    The Economic Case for Divesting from Fossil Fuels
  • 10
    Breakdown: Penetration of Renewable Energy in Selected Markets
  • 5
    Ireland Keen to Hit 2030 Renewable Targets, Says EU Ambassador
  • 4
    No Easy Fix for Broken Wind Turbine at US High School

Total Access Partners

Growing Your Business? Learn More about Total Access
  • Renewable Energy World Europe
  • marcus evans
  • Rotork plc
  • AllEarth Renewables
  • Renewable Energy World Asia
  • Mersen (formerly Ferraz Shawmut)
  • Associated Renewable
  • Trojan Battery Company
News
  • Renewable Energy
  • Solar Energy
  • Wind Energy
  • Bioenergy
  • Geothermal Energy
  • Hyrdo Power
  • Blogs
  • Video
  • Finance
Resources
  • Companies
  • Products
  • Careers
  • Events
  • Webcasts
  • White Papers
  • Magazines
  • Press Releases
  • e-Newsletters
Company
  • About Us
  • Our Team
  • Contact Us
  • Advertising & Services
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms & Conditions
  • Site Map
  • News
  • Conference & Expo
Network Partners - Magazines
  • Hydro Review Magazine
  • Hydro Review Worldwide Magazine
  • Renewable Energy World Magazine
Network Partners - Events
  • Power-Gen International
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo North America
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Europe
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Asia
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo Africa
  • Renewable Energy World Conference & Expo India
  • HydroVision International
  • HydroVision Brazil
  • HydroVision India
  • HydroVision Russia
© Copyright 1999-2013 RenewableEnergyWorld.com - All rights reserved.
RenewableEnergyWorld.com - World's #1 Renewable Energy Network for news & Information