Power Sharing Pitched To Ease Clean Energy Transition

OCT. 9, 2024…..Policymakers across the northeastern United States and eastern Canada are grappling with the best way to navigate a complicated transition to clean energy, and a group of experts wants them to consider sharing power more directly across the border.

Clean energy advocates and academics laid out a case Wednesday for embracing a “bidirectional” approach, which would split Canadian hydropower and New England offshore wind energy for the two countries depending on fluctuations in availablity and demand.

“Adopting a bidirectional planning approach affords us the opportunity for the region’s whole to become greater than the sum of its parts, which otherwise might look like the states and provinces and their respective system operators acting by themselves,” said Jamie Dickerson, senior director of climate and clean energy programs at The Acadia Center.

But turning that concept into reality requires more work, Dickerson and other experts said at a discussion hosted by the Environmental League of Mass., the New England for Offshore Wind coalition and the Acadia Center.

New England governors, including Gov. Maura Healey, and eastern Canadian premiers last month announced they would revive a cross-border energy committee with a goal of boosting regional collaboration and planning.

“It’s happening in pieces, and now it’s about stitching it all together,” Dickerson said.

To read the full article from State House News, click here.

Panel Calls for Greater Interregional Planning Across the Northeast

Unlocking the full potential of Quebec hydropower to balance renewables through the Northeast will require major efforts to overcome barriers to transmission planning and development, speakers at a webinar led by the Acadia Center emphasized on Oct. 9.

While studies have shown increased bidirectional transmission capacity between the Eastern Canadian provinces and the Eastern U.S. could significantly reduce the costs of decarbonizing the grid, such transmission projects so far have struggled. (See Québec, New England See Shifting Role for Canadian Hydropower and National Grid Backs out of Twin States Clean Energy Link Project.)

To read the full article from RTO Insider, click here.

More good news for heat pumps in Massachusetts, as regulators order National Grid to develop special rate

Environmental advocates are hailing a decision by Massachusetts regulators that will give more than 1.3 million households access to lower winter electricity prices if they use a heat pump in their home.

Public utilities regulators on Monday ordered National Grid, the state’s second-largest electric company, to develop a lower, seasonal rate for houses with heat pumps. The decision comes three months after the state approved a similar rate plan by Unitil, an electric utility that serves 108,500 Massachusetts households.

“They hit the nail on the head here,” said Kyle Murray, Massachusetts program director for climate and energy nonprofit Acadia Center.

To read the full article from Energy News Network, click here.

Advocates hope utility’s winter heat pump rate discount becomes model for Massachusetts utilities

Residents with heat pumps in four Massachusetts towns will soon pay hundreds of dollars less for their electricity over the winter, thanks to a new pricing approach advocates hope will become a model for utilities across the state.

The cost of powering these systems though, can be its own problem. Natural gas prices have been trending precipitously downward for the past two years and Massachusetts has long had some of the highest electricity prices in the country. This disparity can be particularly stark in the winter, when consumers using natural gas for heating get priority, requiring the grid to lean more heavily on dirtier, more expensive oil- and coal-fueled power plants, said Kyle Murray, Massachusetts program director for climate and energy nonprofit Acadia Center.

So switching from natural gas to an electric heat source — even a more efficient one like a heat pump — doesn’t always mean savings for a consumer, especially those with lower incomes.

“Electric rates are disproportionately higher than gas rates in the region,” Murray said.

Public utilities regulators are in the middle of considering a rate case filed by National Grid, which serves some 1.3 million customers in Massachusetts. National Grid has proposed what it calls a technology-neutral “electrification rate,” which would provide discounts to certain high-volume energy users, which would include heat pump users.

However, several advocates for low-income households and clean energy — including Acadia Center, Conservation Law Foundation, Environmental Defense Fund, Low-Income Energy Affordability Network — as well as the state energy department and Attorney General Andrea Campbell argue that this approach is inadequate. They’ve submitted comments urging regulators to require National Grid to offer a heat pump rate similar to Unitil’s plan, but modified to work within National Grid’s pricing model.

“Every intervenor in the docket who commented on the electrification proposal in any capacity was negative on it,” Murray said. “And the [department of public utilities] in its questioning seemed fairly skeptical as well.”

National Grid declined to comment on the pending rate case.

To read the full article from Energy News Network, click here.

Learn about three nonprofits working to foster innovation and build resilient infrastructure

Every month in 2024, we are highlighting the work of Give Lively member nonprofits in one category of the 17 Sustainable Development Goals outlined in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, adopted by all United Nations Member States in 2015.

The United Nations website states that “the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)… are an urgent call for action by all countries – developed and developing – in a global partnership. They recognize that ending poverty and other deprivations must go hand-in-hand with strategies that improve health and education, reduce inequality, and spur economic growth – all while tackling climate change and working to preserve our oceans and forests.”

‍SDG Goal 9: Build resilient infrastructure, promote inclusive and sustainable industrialization and foster innovation

Acadia Center

This organization’s mission is to advance bold, effective clean energy solutions for a livable climate and a stronger, more equitable economy  in the northeast of the United States. Acadia Center believes that for the future to be climate-safe, humanity can’t afford to play it safe. Their audacious plan? Cut carbon emissions in the Northeast by 50% or more by 2030. Together with policymakers, environmental justice partners and donors, Acadia Center aims to build an energy system that puts people front and center, shifting conversations to promote equitable solutions. Acadia Center works to amplify voices that are not always heard or heeded, striving to find common ground so that our communities have clean, healthy, affordable energy so we all can thrive.

Acadia Center uses a Give Lively-powered Simple Donation Widget to collect donations on its website. It also used a Campaign Page on Earth Day: “Reimagining, Representing, and Reinforcing this Earth Day with Acadia Center!”

To read the full article from Give Lively, click here.

Mass. Gov. Healey Includes Permitting Reform in Budget Proposal

Following the failure of the Massachusetts House and Senate to reach common ground on a climate bill this summer, Gov. Maura Healey (D) has proposed to include clean energy permitting and procurement provisions in a supplemental budget bill announced Sept. 11.

While the permitting and siting reform framework largely has been agreed-on for months, legislators were unable to overcome disagreements between the House and Senate over natural gas and competitive electricity supplier reforms before the end of the formal legislative session in July. (See Mass. Lawmakers Fail to Pass Permitting, Gas Utility Reform and Mass. Legislature Faces Looming Deadline to Pass Permitting Reform.)

Kyle Murray of the Acadia Center said the administration’s inclusion of the permitting reforms in the budget bill “probably signals that they didn’t sense likely movement” in the negotiations between the House and Senate.

He said reforms to expedite clean energy permitting and to enable the transition off natural gas are key aspects of the state’s clean energy transition but added that “any climate bill that moves forward must take practical and common-sense steps to address the gradual decommissioning of the sprawling natural gas system. Any bill that does not do so is not acceptable.”

To read the full article from RTO Insider, click here.

With more extreme temperatures, are ‘virtual power plants’ the solution to our energy needs?

Massachusetts residents can now opt into a connected ‘virtual power plant’ system that puts less stress on the power grid. We take a look at what they are and how they work and how your home might connect to them.

Massachusetts Undersecretary of Energy Mike Judge, Acadia Center clean grid program manager Joe LaRusso and WBUR environmental reporter Miriam Wasser join Radio Boston to discuss.

“I think it represents a significant difference in the way we think about the grid. I think that our parents and grandparents as customers of electricity customers thought of themselves as recipients – that the grid was delivering power to them and now with virtual power plants, what we’re essentially seeing is a grid that’s interactive, where each one of our homes can act as a grid asset so that we can support the grid in turn. And so it really is, you know, a situation where there’s give and take now with the grid.”

“Right now the grid is an important juncture. The next 25 years are very important. We’re going to be using much more energy and we’re going to have to build much more transmission in order to deliver that energy to customers. ISO New England issued a report, 2050 transmission report, and in that report they referred to the historical peak of 28 gigawatts, which occurred about 10 years ago, in fact. So that was the most that we’ve ever had in terms of power generated to meet. And in the region, 28 gigawatts. They’re estimating that the peak in 2050 might be 51 gigawatts, maybe as much as 57 gigawatts – much higher number. The cost of building the transmission to meet that peak is extremely expensive. ISO New England estimates that to go from 28 gigawatts to 51 gigawatts each GW that we add to the peak will require a $750 million in transmission investments. If we have to go from 51 to 57, those additional 6 gigawatts, the amount required to build transmission to meet a 57 kilowatt peak, each one of those gigawatts would cost a billion and a half dollars. So clearly we minimize the expense of building the future grid that we need by minimizing the peak, and VPP will be an important element in reducing that peak and avoiding the cost that we might otherwise have to make in order to meet the future peak.”

To listen to the full broadcast from wbur, click here.

Bridging the Gap: New England’s transmission planning and Order 1920

Transmission lines can carry electricity over long distances, delivering power across the U.S. and keeping the lights on. The electricity grid is changing, and we need to plan for new transmission that will meet the needs of the future, where clean energy will provide most of the power to meet growing demand. Long-term transmission planning is the process of evaluating future transmission needs and is essential to build a cost-effective grid that can support the clean energy transition. This past May, ISO New England (ISO-NE) took a major step forward when the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) approved its Longer-Term Transmission Planning Process (LTTP). The LTTP is a monumental step forward, demonstrating the region’s commitment to building a future-ready grid. If all goes to plan, it will soon result in the construction of new, urgently needed transmission lines.

Just four days after ISO-NE filed its proposal for FERC approval, FERC issued its long-anticipated Order 1920. Order 1920 mandates that all planning regions implement a regular long-term transmission planning process. Grid planning entities, such as ISO-NE, now have until June 2025 to develop and align their processes to meet the requirements set forth in Order 1920.

Although the LTTP closely aligns with Order 1920, there are still some key differences, as NRDC, Acadia Center, and other partners highlighted in joint comments to FERC. This blog will explore and clarify these distinctions. ISO-NE and stakeholders in the New England region should leverage the LTTP to deliver transmission benefits in the near term while evolving toward a more robust long-term framework under FERC Order 1920, providing significant and lasting rewards for consumers and the climate.

Planning cycles

The first key difference between LTTP and Order 1920 lies in the regularity of the planning cycles. Order 1920 mandates that transmission providers conduct Long-Term Regional Transmission Planning at fixed five-year intervals. In contrast, ISO-NE’s current process is initiated only at the request of the New England States Committee on Electricity (NESCOE), which represents the collective perspective of the New England Governors. The LTTP planning horizon goes out to 2050. To comply with Order 1920, ISO-NE will need to establish a planning process that operates automatically at least every five years, independent of stakeholder requests, and incorporates a 20-year planning horizon. The planning intervals and horizon are critical given the fast pace of technological change and market conditions as well as the long timeframe for developing new transmission infrastructure.

In addition to having the authority to initiate the LTTP process, NESCOE also has the authority to terminate it. To comply with Order 1920, however, the planning process cannot be terminated at the request of the states. While the process must remain ongoing once initiated, it must also incorporate robust state input throughout.

Scenario planning

The future of the power system is uncertain, influenced by various factors such as projected demand, extreme weather events, the integration of more clean energy, and the retirement of fossil fuel resources. To address this uncertainty, Order 1920 requires grid planners to consider at least three plausible and diverse future “scenarios.” These scenarios must account for seven key inputs, the first three of which are mandatory and cannot be discounted.

ISO-NE’s transmission planning process consists of two key parts. The first part is triggered when NESCOE requests a “Longer Term Transmission Study” to assess the future needs of the power grid. While ISO-NE’s initial transmission study, released in early 2024, is a strong example of planning for uncertainty, future studies should incorporate at least three scenarios, utilizing the essential inputs mentioned earlier. Additionally, these studies should be shaped by robust stakeholder engagement to ensure that the inputs are well-informed and comprehensive.

Furthermore, Order 1920 mandates that each scenario includes an “extreme weather sensitivity” to ensure the grid’s resilience against climate-induced extreme weather events, such as severe winter storms. To comply with Order 1920, ISO-NE could leverage an existing model to develop extreme weather scenarios—the Probabilistic Energy Adequacy Tool—which can assess the risk of extreme weather events.

Benefits analysis

Once scenarios are developed, grid planning regions must evaluate potential transmission solutions. Order 1920 requires potential projects to be evaluated against seven “benefits,” which are detailed below. This process ensures that the final selected projects will provide the most comprehensive benefits to the region.

ISO-NE’s LTTP takes into account five key benefits, most of which align with those required by Order 1920. However, due to some combinations and overlap, there is one crucial benefit from Order 1920 that is missing and must be incorporated into ISO-NE’s process: the “mitigation of extreme weather and unexpected system conditions.” The table below provides a simple overview of these benefit categories. For a more nuanced side-by-side comparison of how the benefits in LTTP and Order 1920 correspond, a detailed table is available here.

Project selection

After transmission solutions are evaluated using the seven benefits, the ISO selects a final project or portfolio of projects to move forward. Under LTTP, any project that meets a 1 to 1 benefit-to-cost ratio may be selected.  Order 1920 allows transmission providers to use a benefit-to-cost ratio as high as 1.25 to 1 to determine whether the benefits of a project outweigh the cost. LTTP’s benefit-to-cost ratio is compliant with Order 1920, ensuring that benefits will always be commensurate with costs and may even outweigh costs.

Second, under LTTP, NESCOE holds the authority to make the final decision on which projects that meet this threshold are selected and built. It can decide that a project that meets the 1 to 1 benefit-to-cost ratio should not be included in the transmission plan. This decision-making role reflects the strong leadership the New England states have demonstrated in public policy transmission planning. Similar to LTTP, Order 1920 does not mandate that projects that meet the benefit-to-cost ration be selected. However, a key difference is that Order 1920 allows transmission providers—such as ISO-NE (under the terminology of the Order)—the ultimate authority to select transmission projects.

Advanced transmission technologies

Order 1920 mandates that planning regions consider the use of “advanced transmission technologies,” which are innovations designed to enhance the efficiency and capacity of the grid. These technologies often involve upgrades to existing infrastructure, such as replacing older transmission lines with ones capable of carrying more power. LTTP does not have an explicit process to evaluate advanced transmission technologies. To comply with Order 1920, ISO-NE should develop a process to assess whether incorporating advanced transmission technologies into a project would be more cost-effective or efficient.

Cost allocation

Order 1920 resolves a long-standing question: who pays for transmission? Order 1920 requires transmission providers to include one or more “default” cost allocation methods for transmission projects that are selected. It also permits a subset of states to agree to pay for all of part of a transmission project if an agreement is struck.

One of the major breakthroughs of LTTP is the coordination among NESCOE states on cost allocation. By default, the costs of any project that is selected in LTTP are allocated across the region based on load. Additionally, LTTP includes a mechanism that allows states to voluntarily cover excess costs for projects that provide greater benefits to their state compared to others. LTTP meets the requirements of Order 1920 on cost allocation, and should inform Order 1920 compliance.

Stakeholder engagement

ISO-NE plays a crucial role in facilitating meaningful stakeholder engagement in transmission planning. While Order 1920 mandates stakeholder review of planning assumptions, transmission needs, and potential solutions, these requirements should be viewed as a minimum standard.

ISO-NE’s LTTP engages with stakeholders, but only those who are members of the New England Power Pool (NEPOOL), which is made up of generation owners, transmission owners, consumer advocates, and state officials. NEPOOL meetings are not open to the broader public. Long-term regional transmission projects will affect all of New England, not just NEPOOL members. Therefore, it is essential that all transmission planning meetings be open to the public, with materials presented in plain language to ensure meaningful engagement. ISO-NE’s Order 1920 planning process should also prioritize outreach to municipalities and local governments, as they play a critical role in permitting, environmental justice, and the development and enforcement of local laws and regulations.

Conclusion

New England’s LTTP has established a solid foundation for the region’s clean energy future. The upcoming months present exciting opportunities to implement this new process and identify and potentially select new public policy transmission solutions that will benefit the region. However, it is also crucial for ISO-NE to fully comply with Order 1920 to guarantee a resilient, clean, and affordable energy grid that will serve generations to come. LTTP is a solid foundation on which to build ISO-NE’s Order 1920 compliance. We look forward to collaborating with the New England States, ISO-NE, NEPOOL members, and other stakeholders to begin realizing this long-term vision now.

Nevada leads pack in race for federal energy, climate cash

It has been just over two years since President Joe Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act, which invests $369 billion of federal cash in energy security and dealing with climate change.

“Given that those transportation sectors are the largest [carbon] emitter in the state, having that is a really, really big push for us,” said Climate, Energy and Justice Policy Associate Jayson Velazquez with the Acadia Center.

Velazquez added that Connecticut is an early leader because the state had several plans ready to go when IRA funding became available. “Having the supplemental capacity of the IRA really just boosted some of those efforts,” he said.

To read the full article from Marketplace, click here.

New Webinar to Highlight Benefits of US-Canada Energy Exchange for Offshore Wind

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 6, 2024
Contact: Samantha Beairsto, Acadia Center, sbeairsto@acadiacenter.org

BOSTON – September 6, 2024 – Acadia Center is proud to announce its collaboration with New England for Offshore Wind (@NE4OSW) and the Environmental League of Massachusetts on a webinar that will uncover the benefits of balancing US-Canada energy resources to bolster Atlantic offshore wind potential. 

Bridging the Power Gap:
How Bidirectional Clean Energy Benefits the US Northeast and Eastern Canada  

October 9, 2024  •  12:00 – 1:15 p.m. 

Register tinyurl.com/587wvje8 

As offshore wind takes a bigger role in decarbonizing the US Northeast, and Canadian provinces and utilities eye growing electricity demand, leaders on both sides of the border must think holistically about the benefits of greater two-way electricity trade. In this webinar, experts will explore how bidirectional flows and interregional transmission capacity can unlock synergies between Canada’s clean energy sources, both existing and new, and emerging clean energy resources in the Northeast – all in an effort to support fossil fuel phaseout, address regional climate goals, and ensure an affordable, reliable power grid. 

Key Highlights: 

• How expanding interregional transmission capacity can enable greater utilization of existing hydro reservoirs as a balancing resource, making greater and more efficient use of renewable energy resources across the border.  
• Fresh perspectives on the changing market conditions in both the U.S. and Canada, especially as Canada undergoes a shift from abundance to potential scarcity. 
• What new market conditions mean for the optimal bidirectional flow of electricity across the border between neighboring regions. 

About Acadia Center 

Acadia Center (AcadiaCenter.org) is a non-profit organization with over 25 years of experience dedicated to advancing transformative clean energy solutions that promote a livable climate and a more equitable economy in the Northeast United States and beyond. Through rigorous data analysis and strategic partnerships, Acadia Center advocates for policies that significantly reduce carbon emissions and address systemic energy challenges. By collaborating with governments, industries, and communities, Acadia Center’s bold strategies help to ensure an inclusive and sustainable energy future for all. 

About ELM 

The Environmental League of Massachusetts (EnvironmentalLeague.org) advocates for policy that meets the scale and urgency of our environmental challenges. ELM is the founding convener of New England for Offshore Wind (@NE4OSW), a broad-based coalition of environmental organizations, businesses and associations, academic institutions, and labor unions committed to combatting climate change by increasing the supply of clean energy to our regional grid through more procurements of responsibly developed offshore wind.  

About New England for Offshore Wind 

New England for Offshore Wind (NewEnglandforOffshoreWind.org) is a broad-based coalition of businesses and associations, environmental and justice organizations, academic institutions, and labor unions committed to combatting climate change by increasing the supply of clean energy to our regional grid through more procurements of responsibly developed offshore wind. We believe that responsibly developed offshore wind is the single biggest lever we can pull to address the climate crisis while also strengthening our regional economy, protecting ratepayers, creating high quality jobs, and improving public health by reducing pollution.