On July 27, New York Governor Kathy Hochul announced the release of the state's third competitive offshore wind solicitation (RFP), seeking to procure a minimum of 2,000 megawatts (MW) of new offshore wind generation capacity, as well as significant capital investment in New York's bourgeoning offshore wind energy supply chain. New York's Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act of 2019 established the goal of developing 9,000 MW of offshore wind capacity, the largest statutory goal to-date of any state in the country, by 2035. Combined with the 4,300 MW of offshore wind generation capacity procured through its prior two solicitations, the RFP will put the state more than two-thirds of the way towards reaching that target.
As with the prior two solicitations, the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) will administer the RFP, and will be the counterparty to agreements entered into with the developers of selected proposals.NYSERDA将签订协议购买选定项目生成的离岸风能证书(ORECs),协议基础为开发商提议的固定或指数价。每位开发商必须包含一份至少25年期的建议书,用于向NYSERDA出售ORECs的合同。开发商将保留与ORECs相关联的电能、容量和辅助服务出售权。
RFP仅限于从美国获得风能租约(执行或临时租约)的开发商海洋能源管理局 和每个建议必须显示 向纽约提供电提案中包含的每个离岸风生成设施(可能不包含三个以上设施)必须最小名牌容量为(a)千兆瓦或(b)设施租区最大可用容量,而租区必须位于美国海水容量小于1,000兆瓦高压直接流技术将需安装电网约束区的所有项目使用HVDC使用时,项目必须“打乱备战状态”,或设计时有能力连接离岸电源变电站,从岸上多个离岸风力生成设施带电这一要求旨在加强发电机提供电的可靠性,并为未来的近海风项目提供灵活性。
Each开发者提交建议书时还必须包括供应链投资计划(SCIP ) 。 SCIP的拟议融资可能包括纽约州3亿元资金,如果本地制造nacelles或lips建议书必须包括至少2.00美元的非国家开发建设费用万博体育app手机登录hrefss/grebank.ny.gov/NYGreenBank 筹资(可算作非州筹资)EST处理RFP关键内容,包括资格标准、提交要求、建议书评价过程、合同承诺和授标后过程和协议Interested parties may register here.投标者必须在12月1日前向NYSERDA提交意向通知,最后建议书必须在12月21日前提交
The European Commission seeks stakeholders' feedback until 18 November on its proposal to define cross-border projects in the field of renewable energy generation that would be eligible to receive EU funding under Connecting European Facility instrument.
In July 2021, the European Union adopted its Connecting Europe Facility (CEF) program for the period 2021-2027 worth EUR 33.71 billion to fund the development of high-performing infrastructures in the transport, energy and digital sectors.
Out of the CEF program devoted to energy (EUR 5.83 billion), 15% (EUR 875 million) is earmarked for a new category of eligible projects, namely ‘cross-border projects in the field of renewable energy', including for instance the generation of renewable energy from on- and offshore wind, solar energy, sustainable biomass, ocean energy, geothermal energy, or combinations thereof, their connection to the grid and additional elements such as storage or conversion facilities.
The Commission is now consulting stakeholders on its draft delegated act aiming at laying down the specific selection criteria and selection procedure of cross-border projects in the field of renewable energy.europa.eu/info/law/better调控/Have-your-say/intiatives/13239-Re在这方面,委员会强调推广者似可申请可再生能源领域跨边界项目状况,但不申请CEF供资状态确实必须被视为项目“质量标签”,允许推广者从市场或从会员国获得适当资金ec.europa.eu/news/cef-Energy-eu1-munds-support-prete-stude-service-s/p/p>Covington团队拥有丰富经验帮助你从早期阶段构建欧盟能源项目帮助您准备对咨询的回应-我们经常对一系列问题做-后,设计您的项目并按CEF、欧盟国家援助法、能源监管、公共订约和项目融资供资万博体育app手机登录ahrfss/www.cov.com/en/candido-garcia-molyneux'>CandidoGarcía Molyneux Energy and Project Development and Finance teams.
In the AJP, the Administration explains that one of its goals is to "[e]stablish the United States as a leader in climate science, innovation, and R&D." As part of this effort, the Administration has vowed to invest in demonstration floating offshore wind projects. This is not the only recent federal action that has signaled Washington's newfound support for offshore wind. In December, Congress extended investment and project tax credits for offshore wind projects. The next month, the Administration summarized a collection of federal actions underscoring its commitment to create 30 gigawatts ("GW") of electricity via offshore wind by 2030.
Government actions already have delivered impressive early progress towards this goal.EPA最近https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-app-air-perti-dection-Educe-winde-wind-a hrefss/www.boem.gov/boem-annocations-Enview-report-ween-force-facility-offshore-Rhode-Island-and-Massachusts'项目Rhode-Island-and-MassachusettsIn 2019, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management ("BOEM") released a statement explaining that it had "15 active commercial leases for offshore wind development that could support more than 21 gigawatts of generating capacity."
While states up and down the Atlantic Coast has seen a flurry of recent activity, states along the Pacific coast promise to play an important role in achieving the Administration's goals. California in particular appears well positioned to become a leader in offshore wind. A recent study estimates that California has over 200 GW of potential offshore wind capacity, 8.4 GW of which exist in current BOEM "call areas" off of California's central and northern coast.For reference, the California Energy Commission estimated that in 2018 California had approximately 80 GW of electric generation capacity installed across the state. These numbers make it clear that offshore wind in California could go a long way towards meeting the Biden Administration's generation target.
Offshore wind is now poised to play an important role meeting state emission reduction targets, including California's goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045. After all, it is a natural complement to California's robust solar generation: it picks up in the evening when the sun goes down, and remains a strong resource overnight. Offshore wind therefore provides a pathway to round-the-clock electricity from renewable resources.
Despite the fact that offshore wind has not yet been utilized in California, a recent joint energy agency study concluded that California will need to harness at least 10 GW of offshore wind to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045. Some do not want to wait that long, and are considering aggressive intermediate targets for offshore wind generation. A previous version of California Assembly Bill 525, proposed formal offshore wind goals for the state, including 3 GW by 2030 and 10 GW by 2040.
Just this week, California and the federal government signaled how serious they are about harnessing this renewable resource to achieve their respective goals. On Tuesday, Governor Newsom and the Biden Administration announced plans to sell offshore wind leases in two of the three existing BOEM call areas: large parcels in Morro Bay and off the coast of Humboldt County. It is estimated that placing turbines on floating platforms 20 to 30 miles off the coast in these areas could generate a total of 4.6 GW of electricity—enough to power 1.6 million homes. Officials are optimistic that the lease sale will occur in 2022.
Despite the state and federal optimism, there are some obstacles that will need to be addressed. In addition to concerns from environmentalists and the fishing industry, some of these concerns include:
- Design Challenges The areas that have the greatest potential for offshore wind in California are much deeper than their Atlantic counterparts. As such, the turbines cannot be mounted on the seafloor, but instead will need to be on floating platforms. This technology is currently expensive, but the rapid technological advances in Europe's offshore wind industry could be a reason for optimism.
- Ocean Use Conflicts Historically, the U.S.Navy has voiced its concerns about offshore windfarms in California causing issues with the Navy's readiness drills along the coast. The Navy has recently changed course, however, and has explained that it is willing to coordinate regarding the siting of a windfarm in Morro Bay, California.
- Transmission Capacity Because offshore windfarms will be located in federal waters several miles off the coast, transmitting the generated electricity will require the construction of new transmission capacity, including seafloor transmission lines that span multiple miles. These lines will then need to connect to the existing onshore grid. Helpfully, two BOEM call areas in California—Morro Bay and Diablo Canyon—have existing transmission infrastructure that could provide potential grid connection points for electricity generated via offshore wind: a nuclear plant slated for retirement in Diablo Canyon, and a retired power plant in Morro Bay.
- Installation Bottleneck As some have pointed out, a century-old law, the Jones Act, poses logistical issues for the installation and maintenance of offshore wind turbines. The Jones Act limits the transportation of merchandise by water between U.S.ports to vessels that are: built in the United States, registered in the United States, and owned by a United States citizen. But the installation of turbines requires specialized ships that the United States does not have— For its part, the Administration sees this as an opportunity as much as an obstacle. It has noted that the construction of a new fleet will be a key source of union jobs. The Administration recently emphasized that offshore wind has already generated jobs in onshore supply chains, including in the steel industry and shipyards as the United States constructs its "first Jones Act compliant wind turbine installation vessel." One report describes construction of that vessel, the Charybdis, as generating 800 jobs in a Brownsville, Texas shipyard that has previously produced offshore oil rigs.
Time will tell whether 30 GW within ten years is achievable given the current obstacles. But the recent pivot of major oil producers to offshore wind bodes well.石油大公司有数十年经验,使复杂近海项目结业并接入大规模建设近海风能所需的资本和供应链行政当局支持近海风能开发的承诺因此可能为它提供独特的契机与化石燃料行业的从业者合作实现雄心勃勃的创造就业和减排目标。
Because two other coastal states in the PJM region, Maryland and Virginia, have adopted offshore wind targets as well, the Study Agreement may be precedent-setting, as utility commissions in those states work towards implementing their respective targets.
Under the State Agreement Approach, one or more state governmental entities in the PJM region authorized by their respective states may voluntarily agree to be responsible for the allocation of all costs of a proposed transmission expansion or enhancement that addresses state public policy requirements. Because the State Agreement Approach is designed to be a flexible mechanism, there is no pro forma service agreement. In its filing of the Study Agreement, PJM explained that the agreement is being used as a first step toward identifying a transmission project tailored to New Jersey's public policy goals.
The Study Agreement requires PJM to use its existing tariff process to convene a competitive proposal window to solicit transmission solutions, and provides notice that PJM will study and plan for New Jersey's public policy goals in the 2020-2021 Regional Transmission Expansion Plan cycle. Among other studies, PJM may perform analyses similar to a system impact or facilities study to assess the deliverability of offshore wind capacity at specific interconnection points.
The Study Agreement also establishes key dates and milestones, including: (1) PJM will endeavor to post preliminary recommendations from project proposals for the NJ BPU to consider by October 15, 2021!PJM将在2022年2月15日或前后向NJBU提供最后传输项目建议,但无论如何不晚于2022年9月1日and (3) no later than 70 days after receiving PJM's final recommendations, the NJ BPU will enter into a term sheet to be filed with FERC. The term sheet will identify the project(s) selected by the NJ BPU, if any, as well as the designated developer(s) and cost allocation methods for such project(s).
Although PJM will make recommendations to the NJ BPU regarding cost-effective transmission enhancements or expansions for inclusion in the Regional Transmission Expansion Plan pursuant to the Study Agreement,, the NJ BPU is not required to select a project proposal submitted as part of the competitive proposal process. The State Agreement Approach allows the NJ BPU to select different proposed transmission enhancements or expansions for inclusion in the Regional Transmission Expansion Plan. As such, in the February 16 order, FERC acknowledged that the selection of any project, developer or cost allocation method may be the subject of subsequent filings by PJM.
A copy of the February 16 order can be found here.
A. Offshore Wind RFP
Gov.Cuomo公告正式开放纽约第二次近海风控项目OREC-RFP20-1(
As part of their proposals, OCREC-RFP requires offshore wind developers to submit a Port Infrastructure Investment Plan (PIIP) that includes at least one of the 11 prequalified New York ports to stage, construct, and manufacture key components, or coordinate operations and maintenance activities associated with the project. Developers' proposals must include a description of the proposed long-term use of the port facilities, including how it will compete with other facilities both regionally and globally. The state will provide up to $100 million in either reimbursable grant funding and up to $100 million in secured financing to assist developers of chosen projects with implementation of their respective PIIPs.开发商提交意向通知提交OREC-RFP截止日期为9月23日,2020年10月20日,如果完全授予,纽约将获得约9 000兆瓦离岸风能约一半的合同承诺Cuomo also announced the opening of two solicitations for land-based renewable energy projects by NYSERDA and the New York Power Authority (NYPA), respectively. NYERDA's solicitation, RECRFP20-1 (REC-RFP) seeks onshore, technologically-established renewable projects (such as solar photovoltaic facilities), which may be paired with energy storage, capable of producing a combined 1.6 million MWh or more. Selected projects will receive index-based or fixed-priced payments for their Renewable Energy Certificates (REC), similar to the payments to be made to project developers under the OREC-RFP. The deadline for submitting an eligibility application under REC-RFP is August 27, 2020, and the deadline for proposals is October 21, 2020.
NYPA's solicitation seeks utility-scale renewable projects that will produce an annual output of up to 2 million MWh or more. Developers of selected projects will enter into contracts to sell RECs, energy and/or capacity to NYPA or a designated entity, and are required to have a nameplate generation capacity that is 20-25 MW or 100 MW or greater. Submissions in response to NYPA's solicitation are due September 14, 2020.
Combined, the REC-RFP and the NYPA solicitation seek to procure sufficient renewable energy capacity to power nearly 500,000 homes. Together with the OREC-RFP, these solicitations are a significant endeavor by the state of New York to further progress towards the goal established by the CLCPA of meeting 70% of its electricity needs from renewable resources by 2030.
importly,瑞典系统通过努力实现国家可再生能源目标,由
The Court referred to its Preussen Elektra case, where a reduction of greenhouse-gas emissions was found to protect the environment, to hold that the Swedish scheme could be justified as a measure aimed at protecting the environment. The Court then assessed the Swedish certification scheme in light of the proportionality principle, which only allows a restriction of the free movement goods if it is necessary for achieving the environmental objective, and if such objective cannot be achieved by less intrusive measures.
The judgment lists three main reasons why the territorial limitation of the Swedish support scheme is not disproportionate. First, the Court took note of the practical considerations that justify favoring energy at the production stage, rather than at the consumption stage. According to the Court, once the green electricity has been allowed into the transmission or distribution system, its origin is difficult to determine, thus rendering identification at the consumption stage difficult to put in practice. Second, the Court pointed out that the Renewable Energy Directive sets national targets, and that the energy mix of each EU Member State varies. The Court went on to note that, in accordance with the Directive, "Member States must be able to control the effect and costs of their national support schemes according to their different potential." Third, the Court overruled Ålands Vindkraft's argument that the Swedish territorial limitation was no longer necessary, as Sweden had already fulfilled its requirements relating to those targets. According to the Court, even though Sweden already reached its target, the national scheme intends to foster investments in new installations, giving producers certain guarantees about the future marketing of their green electricity, thus assuring investors' confidence.
While logical from a business perspective, this generous proportionality assessment fails to address precisely why territorial restrictions in national support schemes are necessary to achieve the objective of environmental protection. In particular, the Court does not explain to what extent renewable energy is promoted more efficiently through such schemes than through mechanisms that are open to producers located throughout the EU. Rather, the judgment focuses on the workability of the current system foreseen by the Renewable Energy Directive, which is based on national targets. In that particular context, the Court considers that Member States must be able to remain in control of their national support schemes, and that territorial restrictions contribute to investor confidence, which can in turn boost the renewable energy produced by that Member State.
Impact
- Investor Confidence – The Court's decision has been widely welcomed by the renewable energy industry. Opening up the national support schemes to foreign producers could have created uncertainty on the renewable energy market, thus potentially harming investor confidence. In contrast, the judgment protects the predictability of investments in renewable energy and reassures green energy companies and investors alike. Indeed, the Court held that the effectiveness of green certificate schemes "requires by definition a measure of continuity sufficient, in particular, to ensure the fulfilment of the legitimate expectations of investors who have committed themselves to such projects, and the continued operation of those installations."
- Decision to the Relief of Member States – Several EU governments will undoubtedly have breathed a sigh of relief after reading the Court's decision as many of them apply support schemes that are similar to the Swedish system. Should the Court have followed Advocate General Bot, then the very existence of national support schemes would have been questioned, potentially rendering the well-established support systems in many Member States illegal.German economy and energy minister Sigmar Gabriel welcomed the decision, saying that it would help Germany's case as it seeks approval for its reformed system of renewable subsidies.
- EU Internal Electricity Market – Not everyone will be pleased with the Court's judgment, as it is clearly at odds with the European Commission's ambition to establish an "internal electricity market." In its Communication on the Internal Electricity Market, the European Commission explicitly advocates removing "possible distortions to the single market arising from different national approaches" (original emphasis). Significantly, according to the Communication, "the Commission specifically as regards renewables envisages exploring options for […] ‘Europeanisation' of support schemes for the future EU legal framework on renewables." In light of the Court's decision, it seems unlikely that true "Europeanisation" will be achieved any time soon.
- Spill-Over Effects? – This Court's decision may have an impact well beyond the sphere of national support schemes. For instance, the decision provides Member States with strong arguments to publish nationally oriented public tenders in the field of renewable energy. Indeed, the Court considered that the purpose of the Swedish scheme is "to support the operation of installations producing green electricity once they become active," and that it is "designed to facilitate the sale of green energy that they produce at a price higher than the market price for conventional energy." This reasoning could also apply to public tenders for projects that contribute to the increase of renewable energy shares in a particular Member State.
On December 24, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) and the Idaho Public Utilities Commission (Idaho PUC) signed a Memorandum of Agreement addressing their dispute regarding interpretation and enforcement of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA).
PURPA requires that utilities purchase power from generators with certain renewable or other characteristics (called Qualifying Facilities, or QFs) at prices that reflect the utilities' avoided cost of generating the power. FERC enforces the program but has left much of the implementation details to the states. In 2013, FERC had taken the unusual step of taking the Idaho PUC to Federal court regarding the state's implementation of the law.
In 2011, the Idaho PUC lowered the maximum size of QFs eligible to receive avoided cost rates. A number of wind facilities at the time were in the final stages of negotiating purchase contracts with utilities but could not secure signatures until just after the effective date of the new lower size limit. The Idaho PUC rejected a number of the agreements because they exceeded the new maximum size limits, finding that purchase agreements must be executed prior to the effective date of the change in eligibility criteria.
The wind producers complained to FERC about the rejections as inconsistent with PURPA and asked FERC to take enforcement action in Federal court.FERC agreed to do so, finding that the state's actions were inconsistent with PURPA because a legally enforceable obligation can exist prior to the formation of a contract.
FERC's court action was controversial with state regulators. The National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners said at the time that it was "deeply disappointed," calling FERC's action in this case "drastic and unprecedented." And FERC Commissioner Tony Clark, a former state regulator, opposed FERC's lawsuit.
Under the agreement, the Idaho PUC acknowledges that "a legally enforceable obligation may be incurred prior to the formal memorialization of a contract to writing." The agreement states that PURPA "establishes a program of cooperative federalism, with FERC establishing regulations and states implementing them in a manner that accommodates local conditions."
Under the agreement, FERC will withdraw its complaint filed against the Idaho PUC, and the PUC will withdraw any of its pending claims.
FERC Acting Chairman Cheryl LaFleur said the agreement "will allow FERC and Idaho to focus on our continued cooperation in implementing PURPA," and Idaho PUC President Paul Kjellander said, "(w)ith this matter behind us, we would hope that we can work with FERC more closely in the spirit of cooperative federalism."
A link to the agreement is provided above.
CAISO operates two bid-based energy spot markets to secure the right amount of resources to keep supply and demand in balance. One market is the Day-Ahead market in which generators make binding financial commitments to supply resources in each hour of the next day, based on forecasts of the next day's needs. Of course, forecasts are not perfect and as a result CAISO frequently commits for either too much or too little generation. When it has too much generation in the next day's energy market, CAISO must pay generators not to produce, so it solicits "decremental bids" from generators to express the price at which they would be willing not to be dispatched. However, if there are too few bids to decrease output, CAISO must address the over-generation condition by issuing dispatch instructions that are not based on economic bids, which can result in the inefficient dispatch of resources.
CAISO's "floor" for negative decremental bids had been -$30/MWh. However, at this level, variable energy resources, a growing part of the market, will not submit decremental bids. This is because variable energy resources generally receive, in addition to market revenues, production tax credits, renewable energy credits, and contractual energy payments, which amount to about $130/MWh for the average wind resource. But those payments would be foregone if the resource is not dispatched. Thus, with the current -$30/MWh floor, variable resources have no incentive not to generate once they have been accepted in the Day-Ahead market.
To encourage variable resources to make decremental bids, FERC approved CAISO's proposal to lower the bid floor to -$150/MWh. At this level, wind resources, and potentially some solar resources, can submit economic decremental bids and still cover their opportunity costs for not producing. With more decremental bids in the market, CAISO may not have to resort to non-economic dispatch instructions to cure over-generation problems, and thus may avoid the accompanying inefficiencies.
The new rules go into effect on April 1, 2014.