{"id":16974,"date":"2018-01-08T17:55:34","date_gmt":"2018-01-08T22:55:34","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/?p=16974"},"modified":"2018-01-08T18:03:41","modified_gmt":"2018-01-08T23:03:41","slug":"fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/","title":{"rendered":"FERC\u2019s rejection of DOE\u2019s pro-coal and nuclear proposal shows evidence can still trump politics"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>Last week the Midwest and northeastern United States experienced an historic cold snap that tested our nation\u2019s electric grid. Like last year\u2019s solar eclipse, unprecedented wildfires in California, and extreme flooding after Hurricane Harvey, this year\u2019s \u201cbomb cyclone\u201d has not created a reliability crisis. In fact, it appears based on the evidence thus far that our electricity system \u2013 built upon the markets and long-standing operator practices behind our grid \u2013 passed this test with flying colors.<\/p>\n

That\u2019s why today\u2019s decision by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to reject the Department of Energy\u2019s (DOE) flawed coal and nuclear proposal<\/a> is such an important win for American families, competitive markets, and the environment.<\/p>\n

In mid-October, the DOE took the unprecedented step of asking FERC to provide guaranteed revenues and profits to uneconomic coal and nuclear plants. DOE did so with thinly veiled pretext, arguing without evidence that these plants support grid resiliency. FERC was quickly inundated with a chorus of resistance and disapproval from natural gas companies, environmental groups<\/a>, consumer advocates, state attorney generals, and congressional members from both parties.\u00a0<\/p>\n

Today, FERC dismissed the DOE\u2019s proposal<\/a>, finding that it \u201cdid not satisfy\u2026clear and fundamental legal requirements.\u201d By finding in favor of the vast evidence provided in hundreds of comments, FERC sent a strong signal that market-undermining proposals with multi-billion dollar per year price tags are antithetical to its mission and mandate.<\/p>\n

[Tweet “FERC\u2019s rejection of DOE\u2019s pro-coal and nuclear proposal shows evidence can still trump politics”]<\/p>\n

FERC additionally and concurrently opened a new proceeding \u2013 one not tied to the flawed DOE proposal and instead creates a forum for an informed and evidence-driven process to take place. Unlike the DOE proposal, which was founded upon vague and unsubstantiated reference to the coal and nuclear \u2018resiliency\u2019 attributes, FERC\u2019s new proceeding asks a more fundamental and unbiased first question: How do grid operators define resiliency, and how is resiliency already being supported? These initial questions are part of a larger set of issues identifiedto ensure a \u201cproper evaluation of grid resilience\u2026not limited to [the DOE\u2019s] single issue\u201d of fuel security and \u201cinstead encompass a broader consideration of resilience issues, including wholesale electric market rules, planning consideration, and NERC standards.\u201d\u00a0

In fact, analysis has found that \u201cno clear relationship<\/a>\u201d exists between increased reliability and coal and nuclear resources.<\/p>\n<\/div><\/p>\n

Definitions of resiliency do exist<\/a> for FERC to draw upon, but it will be unlikely to find them in the DOE proposal, which did not identify a single one relevant to electric generation. DOE likewise didn\u2019t identify a relationship between its undefined resiliency goals and its desire to prop up uneconomic coal and nuclear plants at enormous expense to competitive markets, customers, and our environment. Nor did DOE identify how resiliency is different from electric reliability, which is already ensured through existing market practices. In fact, analysis has found that \u201cno clear relationship<\/a>\u201d exists between increased reliability and coal and nuclear resources. To the extent DOE is concerned with reliability, the past few days \u2013 during which more than 700 megawatts of nuclear energy were lost<\/a> due to a downed power line \u2013 show we need to take a closer look at improving transmission and distribution, not propping up uneconomic generation. FERC today suggests that it will take this evidence into account in its newly instituted proceeding.<\/p>\n

FERC\u2019s decision to reject the DOE\u2019s proposal and institutes its own action makes clear that flawed assumptions and processes cannot form the basis of action. By dismissing the DOE proposal, FERC avoids real and negative impacts on our electric grid and the competitive markets where energy is bought and sold, including massive cost increases, out-of-market actions, and unduly preferential treatment to politically-favored coal and nuclear resources.<\/p>\n

More needs to be done, and engaged and committed stakeholders and experts will be crucial to identifying and advocating for a good result in the newly-opened FERC proceeding. Today, however, FERC sends a strong signal that costly actions that stifle innovation and undermine the efficiency gained through market structures is antithetical to a well-functioning electricity sector.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Last week the Midwest and northeastern United States experienced an historic cold snap that tested our nation\u2019s electric grid. Like last year\u2019s solar eclipse, unprecedented wildfires in California, and extreme flooding after Hurricane Harvey, this year\u2019s \u201cbomb cyclone\u201d has not created a reliability crisis. In fact, it appears based on the evidence thus far that …<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":39943,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[42996,4127,84830],"tags":[],"coauthors":[],"class_list":["post-16974","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-smart-power","category-dynamic-pricing","category-grid-modernization"],"acf":[],"yoast_head":"\nFERC\u2019s rejection of DOE\u2019s pro-coal and nuclear proposal shows evidence can still trump politics - Energy Exchange<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"FERC\u2019s rejection of DOE\u2019s pro-coal and nuclear proposal shows evidence can still trump politics - Energy Exchange\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Last week the Midwest and northeastern United States experienced an historic cold snap that tested our nation\u2019s electric grid. Like last year\u2019s solar eclipse, unprecedented wildfires in California, and extreme flooding after Hurricane Harvey, this year\u2019s \u201cbomb cyclone\u201d has not created a reliability crisis. In fact, it appears based on the evidence thus far that ...\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Energy Exchange\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2018-01-08T22:55:34+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2018-01-08T23:03:41+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"http:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-content\/blogs.dir\/38\/files\/2018\/01\/denied-300x154.png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Michael Panfil\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@Michael_Panfil\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Michael Panfil\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"3 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/08\\\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/08\\\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Michael Panfil\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/9329f039b49a976133e6ae676f044fa7\"},\"headline\":\"FERC\u2019s rejection of DOE\u2019s pro-coal and nuclear proposal shows evidence can still trump politics\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-01-08T22:55:34+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-08T23:03:41+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/08\\\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":702,\"commentCount\":4,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/08\\\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"http:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/wp-content\\\/blogs.dir\\\/38\\\/files\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/denied-300x154.png\",\"articleSection\":[\"Clean Energy\",\"Electricity Pricing\",\"Grid Modernization\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/08\\\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/08\\\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/08\\\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\\\/\",\"name\":\"FERC\u2019s rejection of DOE\u2019s pro-coal and nuclear proposal shows evidence can still trump politics - Energy Exchange\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/08\\\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/08\\\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"http:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/wp-content\\\/blogs.dir\\\/38\\\/files\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/denied-300x154.png\",\"datePublished\":\"2018-01-08T22:55:34+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2018-01-08T23:03:41+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/9329f039b49a976133e6ae676f044fa7\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/08\\\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/08\\\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/08\\\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"http:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/wp-content\\\/blogs.dir\\\/38\\\/files\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/denied-300x154.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"http:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/wp-content\\\/blogs.dir\\\/38\\\/files\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/denied-300x154.png\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/2018\\\/01\\\/08\\\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"FERC\u2019s rejection of DOE\u2019s pro-coal and nuclear proposal shows evidence can still trump politics\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/\",\"name\":\"Energy Exchange\",\"description\":\"Accelerating the clean energy revolution\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/9329f039b49a976133e6ae676f044fa7\",\"name\":\"Michael Panfil\",\"description\":\"Attorney Michael Panfil is an attorney for the EDF Clean Energy Program, focusing on reducing energy demand throughout the electric power grid. He also engages on efforts to reduce emissions throughout the United States by advocating for the deployment of smarter technology, improved design standards, and sustainable practices. Follow Michael on Twitter \u00bb\",\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/www.edf.org\\\/people\\\/michael-panfil\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/Michael_Panfil\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/blogs.edf.org\\\/energyexchange\\\/author\\\/mpanfil\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"FERC\u2019s rejection of DOE\u2019s pro-coal and nuclear proposal shows evidence can still trump politics - Energy Exchange","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"FERC\u2019s rejection of DOE\u2019s pro-coal and nuclear proposal shows evidence can still trump politics - Energy Exchange","og_description":"Last week the Midwest and northeastern United States experienced an historic cold snap that tested our nation\u2019s electric grid. Like last year\u2019s solar eclipse, unprecedented wildfires in California, and extreme flooding after Hurricane Harvey, this year\u2019s \u201cbomb cyclone\u201d has not created a reliability crisis. In fact, it appears based on the evidence thus far that ...","og_url":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/","og_site_name":"Energy Exchange","article_published_time":"2018-01-08T22:55:34+00:00","article_modified_time":"2018-01-08T23:03:41+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"http:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-content\/blogs.dir\/38\/files\/2018\/01\/denied-300x154.png","type":"","width":"","height":""}],"author":"Michael Panfil","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@Michael_Panfil","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Michael Panfil","Est. reading time":"3 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/"},"author":{"name":"Michael Panfil","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/#\/schema\/person\/9329f039b49a976133e6ae676f044fa7"},"headline":"FERC\u2019s rejection of DOE\u2019s pro-coal and nuclear proposal shows evidence can still trump politics","datePublished":"2018-01-08T22:55:34+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-08T23:03:41+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/"},"wordCount":702,"commentCount":4,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"http:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-content\/blogs.dir\/38\/files\/2018\/01\/denied-300x154.png","articleSection":["Clean Energy","Electricity Pricing","Grid Modernization"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/","url":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/","name":"FERC\u2019s rejection of DOE\u2019s pro-coal and nuclear proposal shows evidence can still trump politics - Energy Exchange","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"http:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-content\/blogs.dir\/38\/files\/2018\/01\/denied-300x154.png","datePublished":"2018-01-08T22:55:34+00:00","dateModified":"2018-01-08T23:03:41+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/#\/schema\/person\/9329f039b49a976133e6ae676f044fa7"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/#primaryimage","url":"http:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-content\/blogs.dir\/38\/files\/2018\/01\/denied-300x154.png","contentUrl":"http:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-content\/blogs.dir\/38\/files\/2018\/01\/denied-300x154.png"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/2018\/01\/08\/fercs-rejection-of-does-pro-coal-and-nuclear-proposal-shows-evidence-can-still-trump-politics\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"FERC\u2019s rejection of DOE\u2019s pro-coal and nuclear proposal shows evidence can still trump politics"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/#website","url":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/","name":"Energy Exchange","description":"Accelerating the clean energy revolution","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/#\/schema\/person\/9329f039b49a976133e6ae676f044fa7","name":"Michael Panfil","description":"Attorney Michael Panfil is an attorney for the EDF Clean Energy Program, focusing on reducing energy demand throughout the electric power grid. He also engages on efforts to reduce emissions throughout the United States by advocating for the deployment of smarter technology, improved design standards, and sustainable practices. Follow Michael on Twitter \u00bb","sameAs":["http:\/\/www.edf.org\/people\/michael-panfil","https:\/\/x.com\/Michael_Panfil"],"url":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/author\/mpanfil\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16974","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/39943"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=16974"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/16974\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=16974"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=16974"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=16974"},{"taxonomy":"author","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/blogs.edf.org\/energyexchange\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/coauthors?post=16974"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}