The Game of Peaks

Weapons used as props in the Game of Thrones
Wikimedia
By Benjamin Skinstad [CC BY 3.0 ]

The Game of Peaks

Cutting back on electricity use on the hottest day of  the summer is not a moral imperative. It is merely part of The Game of Peaks. This game allows large utilities to shift costs to smaller utilities and co-operatives.

Luckily Game of Peaks is all about accountants, not swords.  The Game of Peaks is nowhere near as brutal as the Game of Thrones. Nobody gets killed in the Game of Peaks, but lots of people get misled about the situation on the grid.  And lots of people end up paying more than their fair share of grid costs.  There are losers in the Game of Peaks.  You may be one of them.

Rules for the Game of Peaks

ISO-NE must charge utilities their "fair share" of system costs, particularly transmission costs. But what is their fair share?  ISO determines a utility's share of the grid-wide transmission costs by determining the power used by that utility during the peak-usage hour on the grid.  The percentage of power used during the peak is the percentage of transmission costs that the utility has to pay.

Of course, this percentage calculation is an opportunity for utilities to shift costs elsewhere. Utilities campaign about "shaving the peak." Announcements state that "we saved hundreds of thousands of dollars by shaving the peak."  For example, in this Burlington Free Press article from 2016, Green Mountain Power claims to have used batteries to reduce its peak power demand, saving customers $200,000 in an hour.

Conservation Now?

The statement about saving $200,000 in an hour is a bit misleading.  It looks like it is about energy conservation, sparing the grid, etc.  It isn't.

That $200,000 wasn't some excess cost of electricity in that single  hour.  The savings comes from the fact that Green Mountain Power used its predictive power and its batteries to reduce its demand at the time of peak demand.  Therefore, it will  reduce the amount it pays for grid-level transmission. Somebody is still paying that $200K for transmission: the overall cost of grid transmission hasn't changed. Some other utility is paying that cost.

According to an article yesterday in Electrek, Green Mountain Power has now has 5,000 kWh of battery storage at this time.  This 5 MWh of storage will not make much difference to expense of transmission on the grid. However, Green Mountain Power hopes it will make a major difference to their own bottom line, as it did in 2016.

Saving Electricity in Summer: The Game as Played

As I wrote in an earlier post, The Not-Stressed Grid in Summer, "beating the peak" is not about

• saving money while the grid power is expensive, (it is not that expensive in summer) or
• diminishing pollution (coal and oil are not in use much during the summer), or
• keeping the grid from failing (there's plenty of reserve capacity). 

 The local grid is doing well in very hot weather.

I am writing this post because utilities only seem to talk about the grid when they are pushing "beat the peak." If the peak is beaten, the peak-beating utilities save money, and the other utilities have to pay more.  It's a zero-sum game, not a moral imperative.

Unfortunately,  people know very little about the grid, except that you "shouldn't" (whatever that means) use as much electricity on a hot day in summer.  If I write about the grid, I need to debunk that fallacy.  I feel that if I am going to write about the problems the local grid faces in winter, I also needed to write about the problems of summer. Or rather, about the non-problems of summer, and the misleading rhetoric of some utilities.

Yes.  Saving electricity is always good

Don't get me wrong. Being thrifty and not using excess power is always a very good thing.  Still,  it helps the environment more if you are thrifty with electric usage in winter (with all that oil and coal-burning) than in midsummer.  It helps your local utility's bottom line more if you are thrifty with electric use in summer.

My voice is rather muted,  compared to utility advertising campaigns, but I felt that I must speak up.

The Northeast Grid and the Oil

ISO-NE Report on Cold Weather Grid Performance

It was dramatically cold here in the Northeast from late December through January 8.  Temperatures of ten below were common. The grid used amazing (30% or more) amounts of oil, as the power plants could not get gas. (I wrote a couple of blog posts about this, which I reference at the end of this post.)

On January 16, ISO-NE issued a report on the grid behavior during this period. Cold Weather Operations, December 24, 2017 through  January 8, 2018.  This document is worth reading.   Frankly, in my blog posts, I simply did not know how bad things were becoming on the grid. Let me quote viewgraph 11 of the ISO report:

"As gas became uneconomic, the entire season’s oil supply rapidly depleted"

Pictures speak louder than words

This is a story best told in graphics.

As I noted earlier, the generation mix on the grid shifted heavily to oil. On December 24, 2017, oil supplied 2% of grid electricity. On January 6, 2018, oil provided 36% of the electricity. ISO slide 14 shows this very effectively.

Slide 14
from ISO report
Double click to expand
Other illustrations are from the same report

Update:  Ed Pheil pointed something out to me: if I don't explain that demand on the grid was rising between 12/24 and 1/1/, the decline in nuclear's share of the grid electricity (from 39% to 27% etc.) is inexplicable.  Did the nuclear plants go off-line?  No. But there are only so many nuclear plants, and they can make only so much power.

The chart below shows a steady line of "daily generation" for the nuclear plants.  It is the green line near the top of the chart. There's one exception: Pilgrim went off line when a transmission line failed.   You can see the dip.

Thank you to Ed.  This was a necessary clarification.

Slide 13

Local natural gas prices soared, while Marcellus shale prices remained fairly steady.  Electricity prices followed the natural gas prices. However, generators that could switch to oil did the switch. Oil was was less expensive. Natural gas prices rose about 30 fold (from around $3 to around $90, as shown below)

Slide 30

Due to power plants using lower-priced oil, however, prices on the grid rose from around $50 to around to $450/MWh, only a ten-fold rise.

Slide 55

Oil Depletion

The region was burning oil far faster than it was replenishing it.  On December 1, we had 68% (of the maximum oil) available to power plants.   On January 8, we had 19%.

Slide 21

For a more dramatic picture, ISO shows a single power plant's oil supply, which went from an eight-day supply to a one-day supply over the same period.

Slide 22

There are many important slides.  For example, slide 17 shows how the generators that were enrolled in the ISO-NE Winter Reliability Program really picked up the slack, and slide 18 compares the amount of oil burned in the two weeks of cold with the amount of oil burned the previous two years.  (More was burned in the two weeks of cold.)  

And then there was all the scrambling to keep things going. Slides 35 and 36 show that there were emergency conference calls about the grid---pretty much every day.  

What have we learned?

Much as I dislike burning oil for power, I dislike widespread outages even more.  I give ISO-NE tremendous credit for the Winter Reliability Program, and for keeping the lights on.

According to the last slide in the ISO program, replenishment of oil is the key issue for reliable operation during cold weather in New England.  ISO-NE is correct,  according to their charter.

slide 62

However, the ISO-NE charter is limited.  For me, the important thing is to keep Northeastern nuclear plants operating. Nuclear plants are thoroughly reliable.  (Yes, Pilgrim went offline due to a transmission line failure.) Nuclear plants keep making electricity, no matter what the weather might be, as long as there is a transmission line to send out their power. 

In cold weather, we need reliability. In cold weather, we need nuclear. 

----

Earlier blog posts:

Successful encouragement of oil on the New England grid, December 27.

More cold and more oil on the New England grid, December 29

Vermont, Hot Air, and Puerto Rico, January 7

Specific Power Sources in Vermont: VTEP Report

Vermont Energy Partnership releases overview of Vermont electricity, lists specific power sources

MONTPELIER - A publication released today by the Vermont Energy Partnership (VTEP), “Vermont Electricity at a Glance," examines Vermont's electricity portfolio. The publication includes the rates charged by each Vermont utility, the type of generation and amount of power supplied in megawatt-hours, the amount of renewable power, and (in most cases) the specific power generators and/or contracts.

“Vermont Electricity at a Glance” also portrays Vermont’s statewide increase in power rates in comparison with neighboring states. In 2012, Vermont’s electricity rates rose five percent while rates stayed level or fell in New York or all other New England states (except Rhode Island, also five percent).  To view the publication, please click here.



The Vermont Energy Partnership (http://www.vtep.org) is a diverse group of more than 90 business, labor, and community leaders committed to finding clean, safe, affordable and reliable electricity solutions for Vermont.

--------------------------

Guy Page

The note above is a press release from the Vermont Energy Partnership: it was sent by Guy Page, who has frequent guest posts on this site, such as Transitioning to Renewable Power: What It Might Look Like.

This new VTEP overview report contains the facts and figures on Vermont's electricity supply right now.

Some highlights:

• Vermont's electricity retail electricity price rose from 14 cents to 15 cents per kWh, while most other states retail prices fell (Rhode Island's price also rose). 
• Vermont used 1.8 million MWh of "system power" (bought from the New England grid) in 2012, while they used only 0.8 million MWh of "system power" in  2011. In 2011, Vermont Yankee contracts were in place.
• Since Vermont classifies large hydro as renewable, Vermont electricity supply is slightly more than 50% renewable.  This includes the power from Hydro Quebec.
• Green Mountain Power bought approximately 0.3 million MWh from a combination of  Millstone and NextEra (Seabrook) nuclear plants .  These purchases were  separate from GMP's purchases of "system power"  from the grid, which also included these plants. 

This VTEP report is well worth studying!

For example, I note that if you add the nuclear plant purchases to the new "system power" purchases, you get 1.3 million MWh.  Vermont used to purchase approximately 2.0 million MWh from Vermont Yankee.  I urge you to read the report and draw your own conclusions about renewables, Vermont Yankee, and the new expanded role of "system power" in Vermont.

111th Carnival of Nuclear Bloggers Here at Yes Vermont Yankee

Yes Vermont Yankee is pleased to host the 111th Carnival of Nuclear Energy Bloggers.

Fitness for Duty: Nuclear Workers and Chairman Jaczko

Gail Marcus on Drug Testing:  At Nuke Power Talk, Gail Marcus discusses Fitness for Duty for workers at nuclear power plants.  Random drug testing has long been required at U.S nuclear plants, and will now be required in Canada.

At Nuke Power Talk, Gail Marcus tells tales of poppy-seed bagels and helicopter pilots flying "high."  Her thoughts are triggered by the announcement from Canada about introducing a random alcohol drug testing requirement at nuclear power plants. Her post is based on her experiences working for Commissioner Kenneth Rogers at NRC during the period when NRC introduced its random drug testing requirement.

Rod Adams on Jaczko:  Rod Adams at Atomic Insights asks about Jaczko's fitness for duty: Why Was Jaczko Asked To Resign?

NRC Chairman Greg Jaczko was asked to resign from his position of authority over the Nuclear Regulatory Commission because the agency charged with independent audits of his organization found that he was not trustworthy and not discharging the duties assigned to him as the Chairman of a duly appointed group of commissioners who share equal responsibility for policy formulation, policy related rule-making, orders, and adjudication.

(I suppose the good news is that Jaczko wasn't taking drugs or eating poppy-seed bagels.)

Follow the Money: Misleading Estimates on Nuclear Costs and Money Wasted on Waste

Steve Skutnik on economic analysis. At Neutron Economy, Steve Skutnik deconstructs yet another faulty economic analysis of nuclear energy: Deconstructing anti-nuclear economic myths: A response to Veronique de Rugy

Recently, Mercatus Center economist Veronique de Rugy published a piece in Reason entitled "No to Nukes," laying out the litany of reasons why nuclear energy is incapable of surviving in a free market for energy without intense federal subsidies. There's just one problem with the argument: the facts. Steve Skutnik looks at the various factors de Rugy overlooks in her nuclear hit piece, including both the actual economics of nuclear as well as the generous subsidies (both implicit and explicit) which nuclear's chief competitors also benefit from.

(I've stolen the chart at right from Skutnik's blog post.  Ms. De Rugy claims that the French must endure high electricity costs due to their decision to have nuclear power.  I sometimes wonder why opponents make claims that are so easy to refute.)

Dan Yurman on Court Waste Rulings: At Idaho Samizdat, Dan Yurman describes how recent Court Waste Confidence Rulings bolster nuclear opponents case.  Two recent decisions by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia show just how much time, money, and political capital have been wasted on developing a rational solution to the political problem of managing the nation’s spent fuel.

World Wide News: Japan, Russia, Asia and the U.S.

Leslie Corrice on Japan: Leslie Corrice of Hiroshima Syndrome posted this update in the Commentary section on June 29: The most dangerous nukes in Japan...NOT!

Corrice says that should come as no surprise to anyone that the two Japanese nuclear plants alleged to be most dangerous are Oi units #3 & 4. It should be taken as little more than politically expedient speculation by a minor group of lawmakers exploiting their nation’s nuclear anxiety to gain increased exposure in the Press. The Diet Group’s nuclear hit list should not be given serious consideration. It is arbitrary, speculative, politically expedient, and clearly intended to keep Japan’s level of Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt at a fever pitch. 

Brian Wang on World-Wide Progress: Brian Wang at Next Big Future submits four stories about innovative reactor projects in Russia and Asia: 

Russian Fast Reactor: The government of the Sverdlovsk region of Russia has approved the construction of the country's first BN-1200 fast reactor at the Beloyarsk nuclear power plant. The unit will be built to replace the existing smaller BN-600 reactor at the plant, which is scheduled to be shut down by 2020.

Chinese Molten Salt Reactor. The U.S. Department of Energy is quietly collaborating with China on an alternative nuclear power design known as a molten salt reactor that could run on thorium fuel.  China plans to have a 5 megawatt molten salt reactor in 2015.

Reactors in India, including Fast Reactors: India is finishing its 500 MWe prototype fast neutron reactor and plans 2 more. India also is making more 700 MWe nuclear reactors.

Plasma Physics in the U.S:.  Lawrenceville Plasma Physics (LPP) describes how they will increase the current of their dense plasma fusion project which should boost the power by about 100 times. 

American Nuclear Society Meeting in Chicago

Wrigley Building in Chicago
Near the ANS meeting hotel

Many bloggers (myself included) spent most of the week at the American Nuclear Society annual meeting in Chicago.  Here's a few links to blog posts about that meeting.  I expect more blog posts will follow soon.

I recommend Dan Yurman's post on the Social Media meet-up, where bloggers discussed how to make good video presentations and put them on YouTube.

I recommend this post about the award that Howard Shaffer and I received.  The ANS also named three new Fellows (the highest honor) and you can read about their achievements. Margaret Harding won an award for her educational work at the time of Fukushima.   I link to an interview with her. The Young Members Group was also quite active, including working dinners and fun runs.  

Will Davis has a great post at Atomic Power Review about visiting the vendor hall and collecting information.  Among other things, this was the first ANS convention at which a Chinese nuclear company had a booth. Here's Eric Loewen, the President of ANS, welcoming people to the convention and talking about all the different events.

31st Carnival of Nuclear Energy

The 31st Carnival of Nuclear Energy blogs is up at ANS Nuclear Cafe. Dan Yurman assembled a fabulous collection of blogs. This post might be subtitled: Everything you wanted to know about nuclear today, but were afraid to ask.

The Carnival includes a series of posts about the Nuclear Summit which recently took place in Washington D. C. The bottom line is complex, but basically, wind and solar cannot provide reliable power. However, if people assume that natural gas prices will remain cheap indefinitely, the market will choose to build natural gas plants. (The market doesn't care too much about greenhouse gases, when all is said and done.) Is this appropriate?

Taking a broader view of costs, the Carnival links to posts describing the levelized cost per kilowatt for nuclear, solar, wind and fossil energy world-wide. Nuclear energy is far less expensive than solar and wind, but the comparison to fossil depends heavily on carbon costs. Will carbon sequestration be required? Will carbon taxes be imposed?

Other posts describe Warren Buffet's nuclear fuel bank philanthropy, and issues about export of nuclear materials. Gail Marcus points out that the "footprint" of wind farms is frequently underestimated. I explain "geothermal heating" in Vermont: geothermal is advanced electrical heating. Governor-elect Shumlin is fond of this type of heating. Vermont Yankee could provide the power for it.

Always something to think about. Always something thought-provoking. No cotton candy.

Come to the Carnival!