AWEA, WOW use FERC to go toe-to-toe with MISO

As a writer, I get a lot of press releases a day: products, contracts, events, staff changes. A lot. If I don’t clean them out by the hour, there’s a chance of a digital avalanche, of sorts. Every once in awhile, though, while religiously deleting and passing things on to other editors and writers, I find one that captures my interest. Yesterday, it was the AWEA, WOW release claiming “unfair practices” in a new FERC filing.

I love this blog headline, by the way. Is that enough acronyms for ya? I wonder if I could fit in any more. Here are the basics before we start into the juicy goodness of the story: AWEA stands for the American Wind Energy Association. WOW is the Wind on the Wires organization. AWEA, of course, is all about getting wind to a viable spot for regular use as a generation source. WOW is about getting equal, fair access to transmission for wind generators. FERC, or the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, regulates power stuffs nationally and MISO, or the Midwest Independent System Operator, keeps an eye on all sorts of grid stuffs in the Midwest.

Now that we’re all acronym savvy, let’s get to the meat of this: MISO is proposing wiping out their current cost allocation system for upgrades to hook generators into the grid. Currently, there’s a complicated system using various factors like kilovolts and regional loads. The basic idea boils down to this: 50% of the cost to hook in generators with new upgrades is paid for by the generator and about 50% is paid for by the transmission peeps in the region, since it is assumed that they will benefit from the load.

But, a few smaller transmission people, like Otter Tail, are a little peeved. See, they’re paying 50% for a load that zips right past them, like paying for a highway with no exits to benefit the businesses of your town. They’ve cried foul. MISO’s heard them and proposed a reversal, with 90 to 100% of the upgrades required to hook in generators to be paid for by those generators.
At its core, the idea seems fair, like a manufacturer rolling in the cost of distribution. You’ve got to get the product out there, and local businesses who don’t sell your pickles, tires or pencil sharpeners don’t wish to contribute to your distribution system.

But, AWEA and WOW point out that MISO’s solution is heavy-handed due to one issue: wind generators don’t have a lot of choice about where to put their power. They can’t be lured to one region or town or county by tax incentives and local parades like the mechanics bay for American Airlines or the next Toyota plant. They have to follow the wind. So, without the choice to decline use of a space, this system change is a bit choking to the wind industry.

So, what’s a fair compromise? Do we put the burden on the company creating the product, on the region that may or may not benefit from the load, on the end-user (if you can track it through that far)? How much leeway do we give generators like wind and solar who have to follow nature rather than tax incentives? And, how much should we expect of their neighbors who “lived” in that area before they moved in and never expected to be charged for the privilege of just seeing a new face in the neighborhood?