I'm here at #RFFlive for their FERC MOPR discussion. PJM and Calpine included in the upcoming panel.
RFF's Cleary giving a MOPR overview now. Great primer if you're catching up!
RFF's Cleary giving a MOPR overview now. Great primer if you're catching up!
Cleary notes that existing renewables and some new ones may be able to win exemptions from the MOPR. But folks in the renewables space have said the unit-specific process is too complex and isn't workable in its current form
Here are PJM's proposed MOPR levels from its filing last year. Cleary says "it’s very likely these resources when subject to these price floors will not clear the market," with the possible exceptions of some solar PV or CC gas plants.
Nice illustration of the MOPR impacts. Applying it to subsidized resources would raise clearing prices, benefitting the largely fossil fuel resources remaining in the market.
"I don’t think it’s the death knell of renewables or nuclear," PJM's Craig Glazer says, mentioning exemptions from the MOPR. "I don’t think in the short run this will quite have the impact that people will think it has."
The Ind. Market Monitor told me something similar.
The Ind. Market Monitor told me something similar.
Glazer says PJM viewed the MOPR as providing "guardrails" to protect the market from state subsidies. But also says the road FERC envisions is perhaps too narrow. PJM asked FERC to rewrite aspects of its order yesterday.
Calpine's Novosel said she was "surprised" by the FERC order. They thought FERC might try to "split the baby," but calls the order "strong and decisive."
Calpine asked FERC to throw out PJM's old rules, so naturally they're pleased with the decision
Calpine asked FERC to throw out PJM's old rules, so naturally they're pleased with the decision
Fmr DOE Dep Sec. Sue Tierney predicts states will not just leave PJM's capacity market with the FRR alternative, but may try to "take back the resource adequacy issue" altogether.
Impact will be the "opposite of what FERC intended," which was to protect the market.
Impact will be the "opposite of what FERC intended," which was to protect the market.
Tierney: "The effect of this is to put a pricing value thumb on the scale for existing resources and as Com. Glick says I think this very much slows the transition to a resource mix that a majority of PJM states … want to see happening."
FWIW, Tierney served in the Obama DOE
FWIW, Tierney served in the Obama DOE
Fmr FERC staffer Rob Gramlich says he's had "detailed discussions" with multiple state legislators looking to leave PJM. Mentions MD, NJ, IL as potentially using the FRR Alternative.
"You could call it FRRexit," he says.
"You could call it FRRexit," he says.
Glazer says states leaving capacity market could be "incredibly inefficient" because the renewables they want are outside their boundaries.
Says FERC should revise MOPR so it's not "so narrow that you drive states into ... an incredibly inefficient solution for them."
Says FERC should revise MOPR so it's not "so narrow that you drive states into ... an incredibly inefficient solution for them."
PJM said as much in its rehearing request yesterday.
Glazer warns unit-specific exemption process will force PJM and the IMM to judge whether a resource's cost is low enough to dodge the MOPR.
PJM and IMM still "having discussions" about how to handle, but Glazer says that uncertainty is a cost not normally considered.
PJM and IMM still "having discussions" about how to handle, but Glazer says that uncertainty is a cost not normally considered.
Tierney fires back: "What I just heard you say is that you and the [IMM] are trying to figure out what a specific unit’s cost is going to be … I don't see how that’s a competitive market."
"It’s a cost-based floor is what we’re trying to do," Glazer responds. "We’re not setting the bid."
"The concept was if people can bid below their cost they can undo the competitive market."
"The concept was if people can bid below their cost they can undo the competitive market."
