Energy Electric Utilities
Energy Newsletter
A Quarterly Review of Energy Policy and Activities in the State Legislatures
March 2007 Vol. 3, No. 1
To read portable document format (.pdf) files, you must install Adobe Acrobat Reader.
(printer-friendly version)
Clean Coal Technology Entering the Mix Ethanol: Food v. Fuel Debate Copper Theft on the Rise Going Nuclear? Willmette, Illinois Spotlight on California Continuing Federal Incentives
Upcoming Events
Clean Coal Technology Entering the Mix
Coal is a dominant fuel of choice for electricity generation within most states and is likely to continue to play an important role into the future. States that use more coal generally enjoy lower retail rates than those that do not. Because natural gas and oil prices have risen faster and higher than coal, states may be interested in using more coal to off-set electricity price increases.
A prime example of a clean coal technology is integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC). IGCC power plants turn coal, and other traditional fossil fuels, into a clean-burning gas, which is then used by a turbine to generate electricity. This low-emission technology allows for the cost-effective capture and sequestration of carbon dioxide, rather than releasing it into the atmosphere.
The inherent advantages of gasification are three fold. First, unlike competing technologies, gasification can process a variety of feedstocks, such as coal, biomass, petroleum coke, wastes, refinery and chemical residues, and heavy oils. Second, relative to competing technologies, gasification can achieve higher rates of pollution removal. Third, gasification currently offers the lowest cost option for carbon capture. These advantages, coupled with the rise in natural gas and petroleum price and the tightening of environmental regulations, play a major role in the resurging interest of gasification.
To date, ten states (Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Kansas, Kentucky, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Wyoming) have enacted legislation with at least one financial incentive for new advanced clean coal technology generating plants.
Another four states (Mississippi, New Mexico, Virginia, and West Virginia) have emerging action on IGCC or advanced coal technologies.
Among this group of states, Indiana has the most comprehensive, aggressive and diversified portfolio of financial incentives. Kentucky currently has a monthly environmental surcharge provision for pollution control retrofit costs that could be adapted to provide pre-approved, contemporaneous investment recovery (KRS 278.183).
To facilitate the creation of state incentives, American Electric Power (AEP) created a draft bill on advanced coal technologies, which states can adopt all or a portion of. The draft bill covers everything from legislative findings and declaration of purpose to the definition of key terms.
Ethanol: Food v. Fuel Debate
Ethanol is a highly energy-efficient fuel that many experts say is a more efficient alternative to petroleum. While ethanol fuel is typically a mixture of gasoline (90%) and ethyl alcohol (10%), the composite fuel burns cleaner, with little emissions and high energy efficiency.
Ethanol is made from corn, and yields 2.7 gallons of ethanol from each bushel of corn processed. Because the fuel is made from a renewable resource, experts say it could be produced indefinitely with the proper rotation of crops to stave off soil depletion, and it is beneficial to both the agricultural economy and the environment. However, critics point out that the utilization of this alternative fuel source could be literally taking food out of the hands of those in need.
One of the most common objections to using biomass energy production, is the diversion of food crops away from those who are hungry, or even in danger of starvation. In a world where 800 million people are malnourished, can we justify the use of food for fuel?
Also, the use of corn for fuel has driven the price of corn to a new market high, make which may it difficult for those in lower socioeconomic classes to purchase any conn-based products. Some research indicates that it takes nearly fifty percent more ethanol to equal the amount of energy that petroleum provides. In addition, the production of ethanol is complicated, energy-intensive, and currently dependant on fossil fuels.
China recently banned the use of corn and other food products for ethanol production, and are focusing only on cellulosic ethanol production. Cellulosic ethanol varies from normal ethanol in its raw materials. The raw material for normal ethanol is sugars and starenes, cellulosic ethanol’s raw material is cellulose ( denied from waste from urban, agricultural of forestry sources). Cellulosic ethanol solves the food vs. fuel debate. Colorado, Kansas, New York and Tennessee are reviewing cellulosic ethanol.
Legislative Actions: State Chart http://www.ethanolrfa.org/policy/actions/state/
Copper Theft on the Rise
Increased demand, short supply, and high prices are attributed to the recent trend of copper theft in factories, business and warehouses. While telecommunication towers, construction sites, and even individual homes are being targeted, copper thefts are particularly prevalent in the energy sector. Electric utilities are a major consumer of copper, with much of it used for protective copper wiring.
Worldwide copper demand plays a significant role in the sudden increase of copper thefts. Economic growth, particularly in United States and China, requires large amounts of copper, and has fueled a used resale cooper market. Within three years, the spot price of copper shot up from $0.60 per pound in 2003, to $3.72 per pound in mid-2006, before declining to just over three dollars per pound in 2007. Copper can quickly be sold for cash to a scrap dealer, who in some areas will pay up to 85 percent of the original market price for the metal. Because of this, electric utilities are likely targets for thieves, who seek the copper due to its high market value, and significant demand for used, or recycled copper.
Copper theft poses a significant safety concern due to the potential public consequences. Some areas experience decreased grid function and overall energy unreliability. In addition, seven people were electrocuted in 2006 while attempting to steal copper products from generators or substations.
The energy industry is fighting back against the thefts in a number of ways. Fencing, signs, security patrolling, and intrusion detection methods are used, as well as resale waiting periods and monetary rewards leading to the capture of thieves. Wisconsin, Oklahoma and Nevada have taken steps to cull the activity by working with local law enforcement agencies to track theft and prevent further burglaries.
Going Nuclear?
Today, 103 commercial nuclear power plants in 31 states provide approximately 20 percent of the electricity used in the United States. That percentage is estimated to grow. Thirty new nuclear power plants are currently in some phase of the planning process. Is the nation entering a nuclear renaissance?
The increasing popularity of nuclear power has been emphasized by the fact that President Bush is the most pronuclear president in U.S. history. In his 2006 State of the Union Address, Bush cautioned against U.S. dependency on foreign energy and introduced the Advanced Energy Initiative. Included in this initiative is the Global Nuclear Energy Partnership, which pledges to meet the nations growing energy demands with emissions-free resources in order to reduce dependence on fossil fuel.
The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPA) furthers the partnership by authorizing money for the Nuclear Power 2010 program. EPA also includes a number of incentives for nuclear facilities including loan guarantees for low-emission energy production technology like nuclear power.
Volatile energy prices, rising demand and impending environmental policy decisions play a major role in the future of energy supply and demand. Nuclear energy is a possible solution to this growing dilemma. Nuclear power is cheaper than coal and the development costs for a nuclear plant are less than that of coal. Thirty-one states have decided to incorporate nuclear power into their energy portfolios and have thus far been able to safely meet energy demand for consumers. A prime example of what’s happening in some states is the Palo Verde Nuclear Generating System in Arizona, which generates more electricity annually than any other U.S. power plant of any kind, including coal, oil, natural gas and hydro.
Not all agree that nuclear energy should be America’s answer to foreign energy dependency. Many point to radioactive disasters like Three Mile Island and Chernobyl as reasons to look to other sources of energy. While Three Mile Island is the most serious nuclear accident in the United States to date, it did result in several positive outcomes. No radiation escaped from the containment building and improved safety systems and industry-wide regulations were adopted.
Another criticism of nuclear power concerns the waste produced and the relatively unknown long-term human and environmental health effects of storing nuclear waste. While nuclear generators do not emit pollutants, they do produce radioactive waste and have the potential to leak radiation. High level radioactive waste can remain dangerous for thousands of years if not reprocessed. Plutonium produced from nuclear reactors can be used to make nuclear bombs, possibly aiding nuclear proliferation.
Congress has approved Yucca Mountain, Nev., as a geologic repository for the nation’s high-level waste and spent nuclear fuel, but it is not expected to open until sometime around 2020. According to the Department of Energy, Yucca Mountain could accommodate all the used commercial nuclear fuel that ever has been or will be generated by the country’s nuclear power plants.
While there continues to be some disagreement over the safety of nuclear power, the energy issues facing the United States are genuine. Energy experts agree that the United States needs to find a balanced mix of resources.
Wilmette, Illinois
Wilmette has a program to encourage residents to buy greener cars. Starting March 1, 2007, the village has increased the annual vehicle fee for all noncommercial vehicles from $50 to $75. However, owners of vehicles that earn the US EPA “SmartWay” rating receive a $25 discount, and those that qualify as “SmartWay Elite” receive a $50 discount. The SmartWay and SmartWay Elite designation mean that a vehicle is a better environmental performer relative to other vehicles. This US EPA designation is arrived at by taking into account a vehicle's Air Pollution Score and Greenhouse Gas Score. Higher Air Pollution Scores indicate vehicles that emit lower amounts of pollutants that cause smog relative to other vehicles. Higher Greenhouse Gas Scores indicate vehicles that emit lower amounts of carbon dioxide and have improved fuel economy relative to other vehicles.
Spotlight on California
The California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) has adopted greenhouse gas emissions requirements for all longterm power commitments made by the state’s electric utilities. The Greenhouse Gas Emissions Performance Standard prohibits utilities from entering into a long-term commitment to buy baseload power from power plants that have carbon dioxide emissions greater than 1,100 pounds per megawatt-hour, which is equal to the amount emitted by a combined cycle turbine fueled with natural gas. The standard applies to new power plants, new investments in existing power plants, and new or renewed contracts with terms of five years or more, and includes contracts with power plants located outside the state. The standard will help the state meet the greenhouse gas emissions goals of Assembly Bill 32, which California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger approved last year.
In addition to targeting electric utilities, Governor Schwarzenegger signed an executive order in January to establish a greenhouse gas standard for fuels sold in the state. Under the new Low Carbon Fuel Standard a ten percent decrease in the carbon intensity of California’s transportation fuels is required by 2020. The state expects the standard to more than triple the size of the state’s renewable fuels market and place an additional 7 million hybrid and alternative fuel vehicles on the road.
The new fuel standard applies to all refiners, blenders, producers, or importers of transportation fuels in California and will use market-based mechanisms to allow fuel providers to choose the best way to meet the requirement. For example, fuel providers can blend more ethanol or biodiesel into the fuels they sell; add a hydrogen fueling station; or offset the carbon content of the fuels by purchasing carbon credits from other sources, such as renewable energy facilities. The governor’s executive order calls for the California Environmental Protection Agency to develop a draft compliance schedule by the end of June 2007.
California is taking an aggressive approach toward meeting its Renewable Portfolio Standard, which aims to increase the use of renewable energy sources by 2 percent per year to reach at least 20 percent by end of 2010 with the long-term goal of 33 percent by end of 2020.
Continuing Federal Incentives
Biodiesel and Ethanol (VEETC) Tax Credit: The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (P.L.108-357) created tax incentives for biodiesel fuels and extended the ethanol fuel tax credit. The biodiesel credit is available to blenders and retailers beginning in January 2005, and is still in effect.
Hybrid Motor Vehicle Credit: Section 1341 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 provides a tax credit for light-duty hybrid vehicles based on their improved fuel economy and their lifetime fuel savings potential. This tax credit replaces the tax deduction previously available to consumers under the Clean Fuel Vehicle Property guidance. This tax credit expires December 31, 2010.
Fuel Cell Motor Vehicle Credit: Section 1341 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 provides a base tax credit of $8,000 for the purchaser light-duty fuel cell vehicles. The $8,000 credit is valid until December 31, 2009. After this date, the credit is $4,000. The vehicles must meet at least Bin 5 Tier II emission levels to qualify for the credit.
Alternative Fuel Infrastructure Tax Credit: Section 1342 of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 provides a tax credit equal to 30% of the of cost alternative refueling property, up to $30,000 for business property. Qualifying alternative fuels are: natural gas, propane, hydrogen, E85, or biodiesel mixtures of B20 or more. A tax credit of $1,000 is available to buyers of residential refueling equipment. This credit is effective on equipment put into service after December 31, 2005, and expires December 31, 2009.
Energy Policy Act of 2005: The Energy Policy Act of 2005 (EPACT)offers consumers and businesses federal tax credits beginning in January 2006 for purchasing fuel-efficient hybrid-electric vehicles, energy-efficient appliances and other products. Most of these tax credits remain in effect through 2007.
Upcoming Events
April
Summer Energy Outlook Conference April 17, 2007 Denver, Colorado
EEI Spring Transmission, Distribution and Metering Conference April 15-19, 2007 The Columbus Renaissance Columbus, Ohio
May
BIOMASS ‘07: Power, Fuels, and Chemicals Workshop May 15-16, 2007 Alerus Center Grand Forks, North Dakota
Fleet Management & Policy Committee Conference May 21-22, 2007 EEI Offices Washington, D.C.
June
WINDPOWER 2007 Conference & Exhibition June 3-6, 2007 Los Angeles, California
EEI Annual Convention/Expo June 17-19, 2007 Hyatt Regency at Colorado Convention Center Denver, Colorado
APPA National Conference & Public Power Expo June 23-27, 2007 Marriott River Center and Riverwalk Hotels San Antonio, Texas
July
The National Solar Conference SOLAR 2007 Sustainable Energy Puts America to Work July 7-13, 2007 Cleveland, Ohio
2007 ACEEE Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings July 24-27, 2007 White Plains, New York
August
SAVE THE DATE!
NCSL Annual Meeting “Strong State, Strong Nation” August 5-9, 2007 Boston, Massachusetts http://www.ncsl.org/annualmeeting/
|
ENERGY NEWSLETTER
Published quarterly by the National Conference of State Legislatures, 7700 East First Place, Denver, Colorado 80230, (303) 364-7700. FAX: (303) 364-7800
William T. Pound, Executive Director
Funding support for this publication is provided by the U.S. Department of Energy. Any opinions, findings or conclusions in this publication are those of NCSL staff and do not necessarily reflect the views and policies of the U.S. Department of Energy.
NCSL ENERGY PROGRAM The NCSL Energy Program focuses on a number of issues and answers information requests dealing with state actions on energy policies, new energy technologies, potential effects of federal energy regulation on states, upcoming NCSL meetings on energy issues, NCSL publications on key issues, and legislation.
Contributors to this issue: Courtney Welch, Hayley Shelton Layout and design: Alise Garcia. |
Energy Newsletter page
Energy Publications
Visitor counts for this page.
|