It’s not usually a good idea to dis federal regulators. FirstEnergy doesn’t seem to care.
Almost two months ago, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) ruled against the Ohio-based utility giant’s request to bail out its uneconomic power plants. FirstEnergy then tweaked its proposal to obtain the same result but, according to its CEO, “without the need for…FERC approval.”
To “FERC-proof” its bailout scheme, FirstEnergy now tries to mockingly call its subsidy a “surcharge” rather than a “power purchase agreement (PPA).” Put another way, by simply changing the wording of the original bailout, the utility’s sleight of hand aims to skirt federal oversight.
Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) is joining the Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA) and others in asking FERC to overturn this end-run attempt – something we’re calling FirstEnergy’s “Virtual PPA.” It’s virtually the same as the original rotten deal, and it’s just as bad for customers, clean air, and markets. Read More
What do economists and environmentalists have in common? When it comes to Texas’ energy future, more than you may think.
By 
Throughout the United States, utilities earn a profit through a tried and true regulatory model that has worked well for over 100 years. This model was built on the assumption that customers would use ever increasing amounts of electricity, and it worked for some time. But, as the need to save power and make electric systems more efficient becomes essential to adapt to climate change, this and other assumptions no longer hold true. Without changing how utilities are compensated, we run the risk of experiencing a true irony: utilities, the cradles from which our modern civilization rose, may become the chains preventing us from advancing toward a clean energy future.