©2009 office of massachusetts attorney general martha coakley transmission planning &...
TRANSCRIPT
©2009 Office of Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley
Transmission Planning & Construction
“When, Where, How Much and Who Pays”
-Comments by Fred Plett,-Utility Analyst
Page 2 ©2009 Office of Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley Fred PlettPresentation to NASUCA
June 30, 2009
Joint Coordinated System Plan
• Midwest ISO, TVA, SPP, PJM, MAPP,NYISO, and ISO-NE • 20% wind scenario • Transmission Dakotas to the Northeast• $80 Billion• 2024 Benefit – Cost Ratio of 1.0!!• If wind projects get built• Transmission cost may be 3-4 times higher!
Page 3 ©2009 Office of Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley Fred PlettPresentation to NASUCA
June 30, 2009
• Testimony in Favor• ITC Holdings, Inc
- Green Power Express • Energy Futures Coalition
- JCSP studies, 3-1 BC Ratio• FERC Chair Wellinghoff
Subcommittee on Energy & EnvironmentThe Future of the Grid: Proposals for Reforming National Transmission
Policy
Page 4 ©2009 Office of Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley Fred PlettPresentation to NASUCA
June 30, 2009
New England Transmission
Renewables in Northern NH and ME
• Northern New England View• Economic Development Opportunity• Socialized Rate-Based Transmission Costs
• Massachusetts View• “Build it and they will come” not Desirable• Giant Generator Interconnect
• Generator Responsible
• Costs Certain, Benefits Not
Page 5 ©2009 Office of Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley Fred PlettPresentation to NASUCA
June 30, 2009
Hydro-Québec TransÉnergie,
NU and NSTAR HVDC Model
• Des Cantons, Québec - NH• US portion built by NU and NSTAR• Cost of Service Recovery from HQ US• Hydropower Sale to include Transmission
Cost• 25 Year Transmission, Purchase Agreements
All – In Cost Must Be Competitive!
Page 6 ©2009 Office of Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley Fred PlettPresentation to NASUCA
June 30, 2009
Local vs. Midwest
• 100 – 250 Miles vs. 1,800 Miles!• Same Discussions - Who Pays, Who
Benefits• Costs Certain, Benefits Conditional –
But Costs Likely Lower Locally
Page 7 ©2009 Office of Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley Fred PlettPresentation to NASUCA
June 30, 2009
Distances
Page 8 ©2009 Office of Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley Fred PlettPresentation to NASUCA
June 30, 2009
Discussion Requirements
• Bottom Up Planning• Stakeholder Input and Acceptance• Proven Benefit Cost Ratio• Purchase Power Agreements
• Performance Warranties
All-In Costs must Benefit Consumers!
Page 9 ©2009 Office of Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley Fred PlettPresentation to NASUCA
June 30, 2009
Project Cost Control
• Helps Ensure Positive Benefit Cost Ratios
• Projects get built, may go into formula rates (non-Merchant projects)
• Should FERC be more aggressive in Prudence Reviews?