Archive for December 8th, 2009

h1

More Tres Amigas interconnection details revealed in FERC filings

December 8, 2009

Michael Giberson

Today Tres Amigas LLC submitted two filings to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, one seeking assurance from FERC that linking the ERCOT system to the proposed interconnection project would not subject ERCOT to FERC jurisdiction, and the other seeking authority to sell transmission services at negotiated rates. According to the filings, affirmative answers to both requests are necessary for the project to proceed.

In the jurisdictional request, Tres Amigas said:

The relief requested in this Petition is essential for the Tres Amigas project to move forward. The ERCOT parties with whom the Petitioner has discussed interconnecting with Tres Amigas have made clear that they will not likely obtain approvals in Texas to construct transmission lines to Tres Amigas without this jurisdictional disclaimer, and without an ERCOT interconnection the unique benefits of Tres Amigas will be lost.

In the request for authority to sell transmission services, Tres Amigas said:

Although this filing is styled as a request for negotiated rates, it is in reality a request for authorization to proceed with the Tres Amigas Superstation (“Tres Amigas”). The Applicant cannot realistically use traditional, cost-based transmission service pricing. Cost-based pricing normally applies to transmission providers that have captive customers who bear responsibility for the cost of transmission under an individual or regional open access transmission tariff (“OATT”) or other transmission arrangement.

The Applicant has no captive customers and there is no regional transmission organization (“RTO”) OATT under which the costs of Tres Amigas can be recovered. The beneficiaries of the Tres Amigas project will be in all three interconnections and therefore will be spread over a geographical area that far exceeds the scope of any existing or proposed OATT with cost-based rates. The very purpose of Tres Amigas is to eliminate the barrier created by the current separation of the U.S. transmission system into three asynchronous grids, providing new transaction opportunities across much of the United States.

The risks associated with Tres Amigas also exceed those associated with a typical cost-based transmission project. As discussed in Section VI.A below, the Applicant is taking on the full market risk associated with this project. This risk is unique in that no one has constructed a facility like Tres Amigas before. The economic success of this project will depend on the market’s response to the availability of service through this facility and on the willingness and ability of third parties to construct transmission lines to Tres Amigas, factors over which the Applicant will have virtually no control.

The Applicant has invested two years of effort and considerable expense to develop an engineering solution to a long-recognized transmission system need. Thus far, Tres Amigas has received a positive response from throughout the industry and from public officials. However, if this application is not approved, the Applicant will have no means to recover the $1 billion or more projected initial investment required to design and build Tres Amigas, and the project cannot proceed.

The request for authority to sell transmission service contains extensive discussions concerning the company’s proposed business model.  I anticipate finding time later in the week for a careful review.

[Various other Tres Amigas-related posts here at Knowledge Problem can be found using this search link.]

UPDATE: The Tres Amigas jurisdicational filing is assigned FERC docket number EL10-22; the transmission rate filing is ER10-396.  Comments on both filings are due at FERC on December 29, 2009.

h1

New sharing button

December 8, 2009

Lynne Kiesling

I’ve added an AddThis “share this blog” button to the right sidebar, which allows you to link to KP from just about every imaginable form of social media. We hope you will!

h1

The Devil’s Dictionary meme applied to climate politics and to financial markets

December 8, 2009

Lynne Kiesling

Ambrose Bierce’s Devil’s Dictionary is a true literary gem. Also known as the “cynic’s word book”, it complies witty and biting definitions that Bierce contributed to magazines starting in the 1880s, with all of the bluntness and prejudices that you would expect (in other words, if Bierce were writing today he’d certainly offend many people). Bierce is one of my favorite late 19th-early 20th century witty authors, in my Bierce-Oscar Wilde-H. L. Mencken triumvirate. Wit in the face of people who take themselves too seriously is a good thing.

The Devil’s Dictionary was such a success that it has become a living meme. See, for example, this financial crisis devil’s dictionary from Matthew Rose at the Wall Street Journal. Some of my favorite entries:

BORROWERS, n. For liberals, the unwitting dupes of unscrupulous bankers and lenders whom one shouldn’t blame for the crisis. For conservatives, irresponsible graspers with a credit-busting taste for cathedral-ceilinged entryways and 70-inch flat-screen televisions whom one should absolutely blame for the crisis.

CREDIT-DEFAULT SWAP, n. loose translation from the original Latin “ubi mel ibi apes,” or “where there’s honey there are bees.” 1. A complex financial instrument vital to the functioning of a modern economy in the way it spreads risk among consenting parties. (Greenspan, A., pre-Sept. 2008.) 2. A complex financial instrument that nearly destroyed modern capitalism (Greenspan, A., post-Sept. 2008).

Another current devil’s dictionary on offer comes from Tunku Varadarajan, with application to climate science and climate politics:

Very nearly a hundred years ago, Ambrose Bierce compiled A Devil’s Dictionary, in which he sought to puncture the cultural cant of his time. Here is an attempt—at much shorter length—to prick a very contemporary kind of cant, that which has swollen the debate on climate change to ungovernable proportions.

I applaud efforts to puncture cultural cant, and if you have any sense of humor you will find Tunku’s definitions amusing regardless of your conclusions on climate science and policy. Some of my favorites:

D is for deniers. A mere notch above Holocaust deniers, these are the people who refuse to accept that climate change is largely man-induced. Heretics, they’d be burned at the stake if that were not such a bad thing for the ozone layer.

M is for Man, who, to quote Ambrose Bierce, is “an animal so lost in rapturous contemplation of what he thinks he is as to overlook what he indubitably ought to be. His chief occupation is extermination of other animals and his own species, which, however, multiplies with such insistent rapidity as to infest the whole habitable earth and Canada.” And then there’s methane, a greenhouse gas parped into the air 24/7 by bovine polluters across the globe; the Medieval Climate Optimum, a warm period from about the 10th to the 14th century which warmists (i) ignore and/or (iii) cannot explain; ManBearPig, South Park’s derisive nickname for global warming; and money (as in “Follow the…”; see Khosla Ventures, above).

If you have any financial or climate dictionary entries, feel free to offer them in the comments. Enjoy!

h1

This American Life/Planet Money and market dynamics

December 8, 2009

Lynne Kiesling

I’ve mentioned NPR’s Planet Money before, specifically their story on the history of employer-provided health insurance. They do a good job (not perfect, but good) of exploring economics topics for a general audience; they did some very good reporting on the underlying macroeconomic issues in the financial crisis earlier this year (although they didn’t discuss Hayek or any business cycle ideas other than Keynes, but it was still better than most).

In a recent episode of This American Life on nighttime activity, the Planet Money team spent time and did interviews in the Hunts Point produce market in the Bronx. It’s full of trenchant observations on the dynamics of supply and demand and the time structure of supply and demand. For example, one buyer is in the market for pears, and early in the night he is having a hard time negotiating a lower price with a seller … but later in the night, toward morning, the seller will be more likely to accept a lower price rather than return home with unsold inventory. But if the buyer takes the risk of waiting a few hours, he might find all of the pears have been purchased at a price higher than he was willing to pay — he doesn’t know the preferences of the other buyers in the market, so he has to evaluate that tradeoff. Similarly, the “hot item” varies from day to day; one day it’s fancy carrots, another day it’s tomatoes, and it all depends on the interaction of what the wholesalers have available and what the buyers who are in the market on that precise day want and are willing to pay.

I liked this story so much that I have listened to it about 4 times in total. Especially if you are teaching a principles course or want to make market dynamics and the time structure of those dynamics more real for your students, this story is extremely useful and well done.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 41 other followers