Thread by @electronecon

Morning #energytwitteer. Hope you had a great memorial day weekend. I had a really great time doing this @Forbes Q&A with @oboylemm from @EnergyInnovLLC. In it, we discuss my @UCSUSA research on uneconomic coal dispatch in competitive markets.
THREAD1/x forbes.com/sites/energyin…

@Forbes @oboylemm @EnergyInnovLLC @UCSUSA For me, it started in a state PUC proceeding while working with @SierraClub @BeyondCoal, a utility made commented that it had changed its "operational paradigm" from “self-commitment” to “market-commitment.” Thus began my adventure looking into @SPPorg market rules. 2/

I began researching market rules and hrly coal operations across the country to understand why coal plant operators were running at a loss in hours when solar, wind, and other sources were cheaper. Published my first report: 3/ sierraclub.org/sites/www.sier…

The folks here @UCSUSA have long been working on the RTO/ISO to improve rules/processes to integrate renewables and quickly recognized the research's potential. So, they brought me on board to expand my research scope to include @miso_energy and @pjminterconnect 4/

@UCSUSA @miso_energy @pjminterconnect Last October, I presented my latest findings at the annual @USA4EE conference. I found that there was over a $1 billion a year in uneconomic dispatch from coal owned by non-merchant utilities. blog.ucsusa.org/joseph-daniel/… 5/

@UCSUSA @miso_energy @pjminterconnect @USA4EE One of the issues we face in stopping this practice is that most people think the ISO/RTO is the centralized decision-makers for unit operations. The reality is power plant owners have a great deal of decision-making authority and can exploit loopholes 6/

@UCSUSA @miso_energy @pjminterconnect @USA4EE Markets are supposed to ensure that all power plants are operated from lowest cost to most expensive. Self-committing allows expensive coal plants to cut in line, pushing out less expensive power (including wind) depriving those units from operating and generating revenue. 7/x

@UCSUSA @miso_energy @pjminterconnect @USA4EE This is not a small problem. Roughly 100 GW of coal, or nearly half of the coal in organized markets, r operated at a loss for at least one month during the study periods; even worse, customers were footing those bills. 8/

I found that not all utilities engage in this practice. The worst offenders are vertically integrated utilities that can lose money in the competitive market and then recover those losses on the backs of captive customers that have no choice but to accept the costs. 9/

@ilsr Had these coal plants not been called by the market, the energy would have probably been generated by either (a) emissions-free wind energy; (b) a natural gas plant that has lower emissions rates than coal; or in a worst-case scenario, (c) a lower cost coal plant. 10/

@ilsr Self-committing is regressive, reducing the efficiency of our electricity grid, exploiting customers, and exacerbating emissions. It also artificially distorts market prices to favor aging technology while limiting investments in low-priced renewables 11/

@ilsr Uneconomic coal gen is happening in states with clean energy goals, like Minnesota. But the MN PUC has opened up an investigation on the matter, not sure how long these shenanigans will go on in that state. 12/

@ilsr The thing that boggles the mind is how simple the solutions are. Utilities could just self-select to stop self-commitment. Or they could choose to run on a seasonal basis (@XcelEnergyMN just opted to go this route, joining the ranks of many other) blog.ucsusa.org/joseph-daniel/… 13/

@ilsr @XcelEnergyMN State regulators can allow for cost/profit sharing that aligns price incentives. Alternately, a regulator can disallow the costs associated with running a power plant uneconomically, forcing investors to take a loss rather than forcing customers to bail out those plants. 14/

Well, that wraps up my tweet storm, please read the whole interview (with many more fun details) with @oboylemm here: forbes.com/sites/energyin…