News Page

AES Corporation is a global company that constructs
power plants in numerous countries. AES Corporation
has now targeted Laurel Mountain in Randolph and Barbour
counties for contruction of wind turbines, with a connection
to the Belington substation. The application can be viewed on the West Virginia Public Service Commission Website, Case No. 08-0109-E-CS. Also, copies of the application are available at the Elkins and Belington libraries. You can provide comments to the Public Service Commission concerning this case by noting the Case Number and addressing your letter to: Ms. Sandra Squire, Executive Secretary, Public Service Commission of West Virginia, P.O. Box 812, Charleston, WV 25323.

When we hear that the California-based Enron Wind Corporation has wind projects in Texas, Iowa, Minnesota, Wisconsin, and Pennsylvania, it’s difficult to erase the thought that Enron has “become a popular symbol of willful corporate fraud and corruption” (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enron provides the facts). Enron was a key player in deregulation of the energy sector. “Before deregulation, there were very few buyers and sellers of electricity. Most power plants were owned by the electric utilities and most of that power was used to serve their own customers. For Enron, then, one of the primary goals for deregulation was to make sure that the owners of the power plants would not be the same as the people who sold electricity to retail consumers… Enron worked hard to ensure that electric utilities would have to buy their power from someone else, thereby creating a market that Enron could broker.” (http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:GaqB_jSipGQJ:www.publicutilityhome.com/speeches/EnronPA. pdf+Enron+Wind,+PA&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2&gl=us).
Not surprisingly, Enron also lobbied hard to develop a carbon dioxide “cap-and-trade” market (http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1813229/posts), which developed into the carbon credit or green energy credit market, also called the renewable energy credit (REC) and a variety of other names. Basically, certificates representing one megawatt hour of electricity produced by non-fossil fuel source such as solar, wind, or hydro, can be sold and traded and the owner of the REC can claim to have purchased renewable energy as an offset to burning fossil fuel. In the PJM service area, over 93% of the renewable energy is comprised of wind projects (https://www.pjm.com/planning/project-queues/queue-gen-active.jsp). In states which have Renewable Portfolio Standards, the electric companies must purchase a certain percentage of electricity from a renewable source or it will be fined (http://www.eere.energy.gov/states/maps/renewable_portfolio_states.cfm) . In the case of RECs, government agencies, businesses, and individuals can also purchase these certificates for 1.2 cents to 5.6 cents per kilowatt hour (http://www.eere.energy.gov/greenpower/markets/certificates.shtml?page=0). AES Corporation has a thriving REC marketing program and has taken the additional step of providing a credit card: “The card allows any credit card customer to channel up to 1% of their spending into projects that reduce greenhouse gases.” (http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/new-ge-aes-carbon-alliance/story.aspx?guid=%7BB8A6A45A -5EA1-4B27-8A0B-9A9BFB426550%7D). This is certainly enterprising, but a review of how coal plants integrate electricity from wind projects reveals that there is no significant offset of coal usage and therefore no real offset of carbon dioxide. It is essential that the coal-fired boilers used at coal-fired electrical generation plants maintain flame stability (http://www.fwc.com/publications/tech_papers/files/AnthraciteFiring_LargestSteamGenerators.pdf ). When the boilers are backed down to accommodate the variable influx of electricity from a wind plant, the flame stability must be maintained at least to 50 percent of their capacity even if the steam cannot be used for that specific period of time. The steam can simply go into the atmosphere or be diverted to another unit, if one is available. When the boilers are heated again sufficiently, this ramping up (equal to acceleration) requires even more coal to be burned than if it were just burned constantly. Therefore, there is essentially no reduction of carbon dioxide due to the introduction of electricity from a wind project. Additionally, all generating facilities are required to have a spinning reserve of electricity that is available at any moment if a power plant ceases operation or a transmission line goes down (http://www.pjm.com/contributions/news-releases/2006/20060501-dr-in-ancillary-services-markets.pdf). The spinning reserve may be compared to leaving your car running in the driveway just in case you might want to drive to the store to buy something. Wind plants are not capable of producing a spinning reserve and the operators of wind plants must therefore purchase the spinning reserve from a reliable source, such as a coal-fired generating plant. This extra spinning reserve required for the wind plant therefore constitutes a requirement for the use of coal. Additionally, wind turbines require electricity from the grid in order to operate their “parasitic loads”, which includes keeping the blades turning when the wind velocity is too low (http://www.psc.utah.gov/elec/06docs/0603542/6-21-07%20petition.pdf; and “Rebuttal Testimony of David K. Friend”, p. 15, PSC Case No. 05-1740-E-CS Liberty Gap Wind Force, LLC). Wind plants simply cannot operate without the use of coal-fired plants and cannot be accurately described as “clean” if the coal back-up is considered “dirty”. Even though the wind is renewable, the requirements for manipulating the coal-fired plant in order to integrate electricity from wind turbines overshadow any small amount of wind power that can be used by the coal-fired electrical generating plant.

On March 3, 2008, the Charleston Gazette reported that the West Virginia Public Service Commission was shocked at the largest rate increase request ever made by Appalachian Power/Wheeling Power (both companies are subsidiaries of American Electric Power). In July 2006, the rates increased 5.5% and in July 2007, the rates increased 10%. These rate increases are reported to be for the increased cost of coal, increased summer peak demand, and the cost of scrubbers for two of the electric generating plants. The increased cost of coal is dictated by the stock market (along with the cost of oil and gas) due to the deregulation resulting from Enron’s efforts.
In the PJM Generation Interconnection Request, Queue P59, Belington in Appendix H of the AES Application, PJM states that “Allegheny Power will construct the switching station on property provided by AES”. Additionally, PJM lists the transmission congestion threat posed by the wind projects proposed for the area. The money spent by Allegheny Power to construct the switching station and also to upgrade substations to help prevent congestion will no doubt be supplied by a rate increase for people who use electricity from Allegheny Power. This rate increase would have to be approved by the PSC. Because this constitutes a rate increase, the PSC Consumers Advocate should be assigned to this case.