Energy Exchange

FirstEnergy Sought a Bailout. Ohio Regulators are Simply Selling Out.

By Dick Munson / Published: December 1, 2015

Remember when we commended the Public Utility Commission of Ohio (PUCO) staff for looking out for Ohioans’ best interests and taking a reasonable stance against FirstEnergy’s $3-billion bailout request?

We take it all back.

It looks like the staff has taken a big gulp of FirstEnergy’s flip-flopping Kool-Aid.

The Akron-based utility giant has been trying to convince the PUCO to prop up its uneconomic power plants for the next 15 years, essentially saddling Ohioans with the cost of FirstEnergy’s poor investments. The PUCO is comprised of the staff – policy and regulatory experts – and the Commission itself, five Commissioners appointed by the Governor who ultimately will make the decision on whether to approve the bailout. Initially, the PUCO staff appeared to see right through FirstEnergy’s cheap trick and recommended the Commission reject the deal.

But last week – despite the previous objection to the subsidy plea – the PUCO staff embraced a backroom deal with FirstEnergy that gives the company even more than it wanted, presenting the utility with an incredible gift just in time for the holidays. This is a disappointing and shocking move that represents a reversal on Ohio’s decade-long commitment to competition in electricity markets. Read More »

Also posted in Clean Energy, Ohio / Read 2 Responses

FirstEnergy’s Consistency – or Lack Thereof

By Dick Munson / Published: October 19, 2015

The list of things FirstEnergy isn’t good at continues to grow. First it was transparency. Then accuracy. Now it’s time to add consistency to the list.

You’ll recall that Ohio-based utility FirstEnergy is asking the Public Utility Commission of Ohio (PUCO) to grant it a $3-billion bailout in order to keep operating uneconomic power plants. Years earlier, FirstEnergy spoke out in favor of deregulation – and the competition it enabled – and against government support. But the bailout request represents a complete reversal for the utility giant.

De-regulate, no, re-regulate

Back in 2007, FirstEnergy’s CEO regaled about the wonders of deregulation and competition. In testimony before the Ohio legislature, he declared,

Competition drives innovation, a desire to succeed, efforts to improve productivity, and lower prices. This basic reality applies to today’s electricity markets – and it should remain a driving force for our business and industry in the years ahead.”

Maybe he didn’t mean the eight years between his testimony and the company’s current efforts to restrict competition. Read More »

Also posted in Clean Energy, Ohio / Comments are closed

Ohio’s FirstEnergy Forecasts are More Political than Accurate

By Dick Munson / Published: October 1, 2015

Nobody can predict the future. But from markets to sports, so much of our world is focused on speculation. Ohio-based FirstEnergy has a habit of missing market predictions in spectacular fashion, often because the numbers it advances “prove” the political point that would most benefit the utility’s bottom line.

Consider the case of Environmental Protection Agency’s proposal to reduce mercury and particulate emissions from power plants. FirstEnergy wanted to kill the Mercury and Air Toxic Standards (MATS) and argued the recommended rules would cost it some $3 billion to comply. That predicted cost came in the third quarter of 2011, before the EPA standard was finalized. A year later, after the final rule was released, FirstEnergy cut its estimate nearly in half, to $1.7 billion. A year later the number was down to $465 million, and by 2015 the company admitted it needed to spend only $370 million to comply with MATS.

FirstEnergy’s forecasting “prowess” also extends to its bailout request now before the Public Utility Commission of Ohio (PUCO). According to Cathy Kunkel with the Institute for Energy Economics & Financial Analysis (IEEFA), “FirstEnergy needs to show PUCO that wholesale market prices are likely to rise steeply so that ratepayers will benefit from the new contract it seeks.”

Also posted in Clean Energy, General, Ohio / Comments are closed

Ohio’s FirstEnergy Gains Hundreds of Millions, but Still Wants More

By Dick Munson / Published: September 28, 2015

At FirstEnergy, too much is never enough.

According to one Wall Street analyst, the Ohio-based utility “benefitted substantially” from recent auctions by PJM, the electric grid manager in the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic. In fact, it appears the company’s bounty for the next two years is $435 million more than it was projected to earn.

This is a direct result of FirstEnergy and other utilities’ successful efforts earlier this year to convince PJM to change how its electricity auctions were structured.

After the Polar Vortex of 2014, when many power plants shut down because they couldn’t obtain fuel over frozen pipelines or highways, the utilities argued PJM should provide higher payments for power plants that could provide reliable electricity in winter months as well as in the summer when air conditioning demands are high. The change, of course, would provide more revenue to coal-fired and nuclear-fired units that tend to run consistently, including FirstEnergy’s old and inefficient power plants.

You might think FirstEnergy would celebrate its success in redesigned power markets. But you would be wrong. Despite the auction windfall, the company maintains it still needs the Public Utility Commission of Ohio (PUCO) to approve a $3 billion bailout from Ohio customers to keep its inefficient, dirty power plants running. Fortunately, it appears the PUCO staff has seen right through this request. Read More »

Also posted in Clean Energy, General, Ohio / Tagged Ohio, PUCO | Comments are closed

Everything You Need to Know about FirstEnergy’s Bailout Request

By Dick Munson / Published: August 30, 2015

After a long summer and several delays, the Public Utility Commission of Ohio (PUCO) is scheduled to begin hearing FirstEnergy’s plea for subsidies today. Over the past few months, Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) and other stakeholders have hit the streets, airways, and internet to explain the company’s proposal. Thankfully for you, we’ve summarized the high-points of all this analysis in an easy-to-read outline. Here are the basics:

What is First Energy requesting?

FirstEnergy is asking PUCO to approve non-competitive purchase agreements that would enable the utility’s distributors to buy power at above-market prices from FirstEnergy’s subsidiary power plants. August 31 marks the beginning of testimony and cross examination of FirstEnergy executives, as well as diverse stakeholders, including EDF. This process may take up to seven weeks.
FirstEnergy is seeking subsidies for the 52-year-old Sammis coal-fired plant; two 60-year-old coal-fired power plants (Kyger Creek in Cheshire, Ohio, and Clifty Creek in Madison, Indiana); the Davis-Bessie nuclear plant, which is two years from the expiration of its 40-year license; and for the utility’s share of the Ohio Valley Electric Corporation. The subsidies essentially shift the financial risk of these older and more expensive generators from FirstEnergy’s shareholders to its customers, who would fund the proposal through fees and higher rates.

Also posted in Clean Energy, Demand Response / Read 2 Responses

Desperately Seeking Monopoly Protection

By Dick Munson / Published: August 17, 2015

They say crises don’t test your character, they reveal it. I believe they do the same thing to your vision of the future. Times are tough for Ohio’s FirstEnergy, and CEO Chuck Jones is signaling where he wants the utility to be in the future: the past.

First, we need to look back to last year, when Jones pushed the Ohio legislature to halt state efficiency and renewable energy standards that helped reduce electricity demand and saved Ohio customers millions of dollars.

This year, Jones’ vision quest is a $3 billion bailout – to be paid for by his customers – that would guarantee the purchase of power generated by FirstEnergy’s older and costlier power plants. In a recent op-ed, Jones argued that the deal would secure Ohioan’s energy independence. Read More »

Also posted in Clean Energy, Energy Efficiency, Ohio, Renewable Energy, Utility Business Models / Read 5 Responses