Texas Electric Dereg Subject of PBS Report

Inside E Street, a Public Broadcasting System program featured on more than 200 TV stations nationwide, has begun airing a new segment. It’s main focus: electric deregulation in Texas.

PBS cites data showing electric prices in

deregulated Texas consistently above national average.

“Over the past ten years, the average retail price of Texas electricity has consistent exceeded the national average,” noted Inside E Street host Lark McCarthy, citing federal data. The veteran newscaster also identified new challenges for residential consumers.

Texas is among about 15 states with deregulated retail electricity markets. The intent is that electric companies compete in these markets and free-market forces keep a lid on prices and improve service. But as experts on the PBS report noted, technological and economic barriers unique to electric power can make deregulation a difficult proposition.

Geoffrey Gay

For instance, electricity — unlike other commodities — cannot be stored. This means that under deregulation consumers can become captive to volatile price swings. And because electricity is essential to the public welfare, dips in reliability or increases in price can cause serious hardships.

“The focus of the original deregulation effort was to get lower prices — and that has not worked well,” said Geoffrey Gay, general counsel for the Texas Coalition for Affordable Power. Interviewed for the PBS segment, the Lloyd Gosselink principal also noted that comparison shopping under Texas deregulation can be difficult. “I’ve been dealing with utility business for 33-plus years, and I have found personally the options available very confusing,” he said.

TCAP and other consumer organizations have advocated for the creation of standard-offer products to make apples-to-apples shopping easier. Under the proposal, retail electric providers would offer products with standardized terms and conditions along with their other electricity deals. These deals would be listed at the state-sponsored powertochoose website. But under heavy industry lobbying, lawmakers have yet to embrace the reform.

“For many folks, especially for the elderly and the poor, going to the powertochoose website (to shop for electricity) can be an incredibly intimidating process,” said Gay.

You can click here to watch the entire Inside E Street segment.To learn more about standard-offer products, go here.

The Texas Coalition for Affordable Power

Questions and answers about a leading electric consumer organization

When it comes to electric deregulation, the Texas Coalition for Affordable Power enjoys a unique vantage point. The more than 160 cities and other political subdivisions that make up TCAP purchase in excess of 1.3 billion kilowatt/hours of power each year for their own governmental use. As such, it is one of the largest organizations of energy consumers in the state.

High energy costs can impact municipal budgets and the ability to fund essential services. An increase by even a single penny in electric rates can cost cities millions of dollars. TCAP members understand this first-hand. High energy prices also places a burden on local businesses and home consumers.

That’s why TCAP, as part of its mission, proactively promotes affordable energy policies. TCAP monitors federal, state and local initiatives that may affect the price and availability of energy. The organization represents consumer interests at the Electric Reliability Council of Texas, the Public Utility Commission and before state legislative panels. TCAP’s original policy research has been cited nationally and internationally and has won praise from key lawmakers and staff.

TCAP was originally two separate non-profit corporations — the Cities Aggregation Power Project and the South Texas Aggregation Project — organizations formed in 2001 for the specific purpose of purchasing power in the then-newly deregulated market. TCAP also is the parent organization of Recharge Texas, and supports its online newsletter, the Recharge Ratepayer Report. In 2012, TCAP released Deregulated Electricity in Texas: A History of Retail Competition — The First 10 Years. In 2011, TCAP released The Story of ERCOT: The Grid Operator, Power Market & Prices under Texas Electric Deregulation.

Also in 2011 TCAP named Randolph Moravec, Ph.D., as its first executive director. The former finance director for the Town of Addison served previously on the TCAP board as its organization’s secretary, and also served as vice chairman for the Cities Aggregation Power Project. Dr. Moravec received his Ph.D. in public affairs from the University of Texas-Arlington in 2011.

Price supports for deregulated electric companies?

Last year was hot. We have to go all the way back to 1789, searching through the tree ring records, to find evidence of a drier summer. And because power plants depend upon water in order to operate properly, the high heat wreaked havoc on the transmission grid. As lake levels dropped, our risk of blackouts increased.

Next week a key committee in the Texas Senate will hold a public hearing on reliability issues and the drought. There will be plenty of expert testimony, public comments, white board charts and maybe a few reporters. A representative from ERCOT, the operator of the Texas power grid, will make a presentation. The chairwoman of the Texas Public Utility Commission also will address the senators.

If the drought is putting system reliability at risk, then what should be done about it? Some have proposed artificial price supports for wholesale energy. That is, some believe that without bigger profit margins for big electric companies, those companies won’t have sufficient financial incentives to build needed generation plants. But consumer groups are discouraging efforts to intentionally increase prices — especially when there’s no clear pay-off in terms of reliability. Any money used to enrich these deregulated generation companies ultimately comes from the pockets of ratepayers. But generation companies offer no guarantees that they’ll resolve or even address the state’s reliability concerns.

It’s a tough issue to be sure, and one that’s begun to attract welcome attention from the media. Both the Texas Observer and National Public Radio’s Impact Texas recently have weighed in, with both outlets noting that Texans are at risk for paying higher electricity prices. Reports in the Texas Tribune and the San Antonio Express-News also help to frame the debate. The hearing, to be conducted by the Committee on Business and Commerce, begins at 10 a.m. on Tuesday, January 10^th. You can find a link to the Business and Commerce Committee website here. Separately, the House State Affairs Committee also is expected to consider these issues during a meeting on Feb. 9th. Both hearings will be conducted in Austin.

-- R.A. Dyer

ERCOT Stakeholders Address High Prices in "Load Pockets," irresolvable problems

Ten months after implementation, ERCOT continues to grapple with unforeseen difficulties arising from the nodal market. As you may already be aware, the nodal market began operation in December of 2010. Previously, ERCOT was operating under what is known as a “zonal market,” a less-complex form of wholesale market. The nodal market differs from the old zonal market in the way that it instructs generators to produce electricity. In the nodal system, ERCOT dispatches generation considering both the lowest total cost and the greatest relief of bottlenecks within the transmission system. The goal is to deploy the lowest-cost combination of generators that the capacity of the grid will allow.

The ERCOT stakeholder process is currently struggling with how to resolve situations in which ERCOT’s systems cannot calculate the most efficient way to relieve certain transmission bottlenecks. Early in the year, ERCOT identified that this is a particular problem in the Lower Rio Grande Valley. Due to constraints unique to this geographic area, the Lower Rio Grande Valley is plagued by persistent transmission congestion, while it has a high population and little power generation to serve it. Such an area is known as a “load pocket,” and load pockets have posed problems for other nodal system operators in the more established wholesale markets of the Northeast.

You can read more about ERCOT
in the special report from the
Texas Coalition for Affordable Power.

The problem is that, in a nodal system, load pockets can produce very high wholesale prices. The reason has to do with a special concept known as “shadow pricing.” The “shadow price” is the price of relieving the transmission bottleneck in an area. Relieving that congestion can be complicated, however. Due to the physics involved in the flow of electricity, not all power plants can relieve bottlenecks equally. In order to relieve transmission constraints, ERCOT must sometimes dispatch more generation than the actual amount by which the relevant transmission line is overloaded. The shadow price reflects the cost of deploying that additional generation to relieve the constraint. Because of shadow pricing, wholesale prices can actually exceed the highest priced offer in the market.

You will recall that ERCOT has a standard offer cap of $3,000/MWh. However, as noted above, shadow prices resulting from bottlenecks can greatly exceed the standard offer cap. As a result, ERCOT has in place another cap, called the “Shadow Price Cap,” which had been set at $5,000/MWh. When there is congestion on the grid, it is the shadow price cap that acts to limit wholesale prices.

Early this fall, ERCOT stakeholders agreed that certain bottlenecks are “irresolvable.” While the constraint in the Lower Rio Grande Valley is the only confirmed irresolvable constraint, there has been talk that there may be others in the market. In order to address this situation, ERCOT stakeholders worked through a holistic solution to impose a lower shadow price cap for irresolvable constraints. The purpose is to provide additional protections to consumers in a load pocket who would otherwise risk exposure to prolonged high prices. That solution uses a complex formula that in current market conditions would result in a shadow price cap at $2,000/MWh. In a further complexity, if a hypothetical peaking power plant in the area earns $95,000 per MW cumulatively in a given year, the shadow price cap would drop to $500/MWh. At the beginning of the following calendar year, the price would raise back up to $2,000/MWh until the hypothetical peaking power plant again earned $95,000 cumulatively over the year. The idea behind dropping the price to $500/MWh is that there is no benefit to increased payments to generators for congestion caused by constraints that are irresolvable, once generators are permitted to earn a reasonable margin.

In the past month, the South Texas Electric Cooperative (“STEC”) detailed their concerns about this solution to the ERCOT Board. While STEC agreed with a lower shadow price cap for irresolvable constraints, they expressed concern with raising the shadow price cap each year back up to $2,000/MWh. As discussed above, there is no benefit to a higher shadow price cap for irresolvable constraints because higher prices can do nothing to incentivize a solution to a problem that is not able to be solved. In other words, there is no adequate market solution for irresolvable constraints and a higher shadow price cap does not provide any benefit to consumers in these situations.

The Technical Advisory Committee (“TAC”) considered STEC’s concerns at two separate meetings. While TAC adjusted some small parts of the holistic solution, it largely left the solution intact, including the return to a $2,000/MWh shadow price cap each year even if the cap had dropped to $500/MWh the previous year. We voted against the holistic solution, because STEC’s proposed modification offered a greater level of protection for consumers in a region where regular market forces and the state of the grid have proven insufficient to meet consumers’ demand. The Board met on October 18, 2011, but declined to consider the holistic solution as recommended by TAC. STEC’s appeal of TAC’s decision will be heard before the Board in December of this year.

-- Chris Brewster

Mr. Brewster is an attorney at Lloyd Goseelink who represents cities at ERCOT. You can find out more about ERCOT and the deregulated market in The Story of ERCOT, by the Texas Coalition for Afforbable Power and the Steering Committee of Cities Served by Oncor. The link can be found here. 

Electricity

Texas Market Still Not Matching Pre-Dereg Levels

Here’s the good news. The most recent federal data from the United States Energy Information Administration shows that residential electricity prices in Texas have dipped below the national average. That means Texans are saving on their electric bills, at least in comparison to the rest of the nation.

Now, comes the bad news: relative to the rest of the nation, Texans received a better deal before we deregulated our electricity markets.

According to the federal data, Texans so far this year have paid electricity rates that are 2.59 percent below the national average. But in 1999, the year the state legislature adopted the retail electric deregulation law, we Texans got an even better deal — paying 7.48 percent less than the national average. The same was true in 1998, when we paid 7.38 percent less; and in 1997, when we paid 7.24 percent less.

In fact, during the entire decade prior to the adoption of the deregulation law, Texans paid residential electricity rates that were 6.4 percent lower than the national average. In the decade since deregulation took effect, Texans paid 8.72 higher than the national average.

Some may note that in Texas there exists areas both with and without deregulation, and that the state’s higher-than-necessary average prices shouldn’t be blamed on deregulation, but rather on prices paid by those living outside deregulation. According to this argument, inflated prices paid by Texans living outside deregulation have skewed calculations for average prices overall.

But here again, the federal data shows this assertion to be incorrect. Data from the US EIA shows that Texans living in areas outside deregulation paid consistently less than the national average for residential service and consistently less than Texans subject to deregulation. This is true for every year in which data exists to make a comparison. You can check out the graph, above, showing the pricing data for the years 2002-2009.

A recent analysis by the Texas Coalition for Affordable Power shows that all these high prices don’t come without consequences. The total estimated cost to the Texas consumer economy from these long years of above-the-national-average electricity prices exceeds $15 billion.

-- R.A. Dyer

Geoffrey Gay receives Glink Private Practice Local Government Attorney Award

CHICAGO -- In a ceremony held September 13 at the Chicago Hilton in Chicago, Illinois, the International Municipal Lawyers Association (IMLA) awarded the Marvin J. Glink Private Practice Local Government Attorney Award at the 76th Annual Conference to Geoffrey Gay of Austin, Texas.


Award recipient Geoffrey Gay

This award was established to honor the memory of a longtime IMLA member, Marvin J. Glink. It recognizes a private practitioner who, as part of a private practice, represents a local government and who exhibits those qualities that made Marvin Glink one of the truly remarkable lawyers working on behalf of public clients. In addition to the traditional qualities of excellence in the practice of law, the award seeks to recognize a practitioner who has provided outstanding service to the public, and who possesses an exemplary reputation in the legal community, the highest of ethical standards, and who is devoted to mentoring young lawyers and educating lawyers in local government law.

Geoffrey is the Principal and Chair of the Energy and Utility Practice Group for Lloyd Gosselink Rochelle and Townsend. He is an active local government practitioner and serves as the General Counsel for the Texas Coalition for Affordable Power, the Atmos Cities Steering Committee and the Oncor Cities Steering Committee. His nominator stated, “Geoff is an unbelievably effective negotiator and creative strategist. His efforts have saved Texas cities millions of dollars annually. In addition, Geoff and his firm go the extra mile to provide the assistance necessary to help city officials become more persuasive advocates for the interests of cities and the public.”

Founded in 1935, the International Municipal Lawyers Association (IMLA) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization consisting of approximately 3000 local governments and attorneys throughout the United States and Canada. IMLA provides a wide range of services and programs to its membership, including comprehensive educational programs, legal research, professional publications and legal advocacy on behalf of its members in the United States Supreme Court, as well as federal and state appellate courts.

Independent Market Monitor Issues 2010 State Of The Market Report

In August, the Independent Market Monitor (“IMM”) – a position intended to be a wholesale market watchdog and created by law in 2005 – issued its annual State of the Market Report for 2010. This year’s report was unusual in that it addressed the final year of operations under the old, zonal market design. Thus, the report highlighted inefficiencies and other issues with that market design that will not recur in future years, since in late 2010 the market transitioned to a nodal system.

The 2010 State of the Market Report contains comparative
 data on wholesale market prices for each of ERCOT's four
zones, and ERCOT as a whole. As this table illustrates, prices
increased in all zones from 2009 to 2010. Note the extraordinary
prices of 2008 -- they resulted from very high natural gas prices
and congestion on the grid, resulting in especially high prices
in the North, South, and Houston zones.

However, the report is notable for its conclusion that wholesale energy prices increased on average in 2010, going from $34.03 per MWh in 2009 to $39.40 per MWh on a load-weighted average basis. The report attributes a 16% increase in natural gas prices for much of this increase.

Despite this general price increase, the IMM again argues that wholesale prices in ERCOT are too low, and have been sufficient to support new investment in power plants in only one the last four years. That year was 2008, a year in which, as the report admits, ERCOT suffered from high prices resulting from inefficient congestion management between the North, South, and Houston zones. The experience of that summer, in which prices neared $4,000 per MWh at times and caused the default of a number of Retail Electric Providers (“REPs”) should in no way be viewed as any kind of “success” for the market.

Additionally, the report again concludes that the ERCOT wholesale market performed competitively in 2010, with no evidence that generators were withholding power or engaging in similar manipulative behavior.

-- Chris Brewster