NYPA SALVAGES NYSERDA PROJECTS (MAYBE): Most of the renewable generation projects NYPA is exploring with development partners are previously canceled state contracts or were planned to provide power on the Clean Path transmission line, according to a review by POLITICO. NYPA declined to provide a list of the names of the projects, so this analysis is based on a comparison of publicly available data and a review of the location, size, date of operation and developer of the projects listed by NYPA in its draft plan. “Due to the confidential nature of our current discussions with developers, we are not able to disclose names of the projects at this time,” NYPA spokesperson Susan Craig said in an email. About 2,000 megawatts from 15 projects of the total 3,654 megawatts in new renewable capacity — which includes 434 megawatts of battery storage (not generation) and 200 megawatts of new projects NYPA is considering developing itself — previously held NYSERDA contracts, according to POLITICO’s analysis. That includes the already-permitted Alle Catt wind project, which is notably part of the portfolio of projects planned to provide renewable electricity to New York City via the Clean Path line being developed by Chicago-based renewable developer Invenergy and real estate firm Related Companies affiliated energyRe, in a still-being-negotiated partnership with NYPA. The developer of Alle Catt is Forward Power, the joint venture established by the two private firms to own and operate the renewables providing power for the Clean Path project, according to previous filings. The sole wind project accounts for 11 percent of the generation NYPA is considering, because of its higher capacity factor than the solar developments. Clean Path has a NYSERDA Tier 4 contract but sought a higher payment from the state that was not agreed to. It is not fully permitted and will not be able to begin construction this fall, as the company previously planned. NYSERDA is not relying on the transmission line and its renewables, beyond projects that have active new renewable contracts, to support the state’s 70 percent renewable target. The next milestone in the company’s contract with NYSERDA is a “notice to proceed” with construction by June 2025, although that could be extended. Clean Path is also participating in NYISO’s interconnection process with a deadline to agree to significant costs — or defer hooking up to the grid — coming in the next few weeks. Forward Power and NYPA are also discussing six other potential co-development projects, including what appears to be the fully-permitted Horseshoe Solar project, Seventy Seven Solar and Twinleaf Solar — all of which were listed in Clean Path’s portfolio. Three other potentially early stage projects with 2030 or TBD completion dates are also listed. NYPA is in negotiations with Boralex, a Canadian developer, on two other solar projects listed in the Clean Path proposal. (Boralex has five total projects listed in NYPA’s draft plan.) NYPA and Forward Power officials declined to answer questions about what these talks mean for the future of the Clean Path line. NYPA has been approved for a $30 million federal grant for the project. “Forward Power is proud to be a partner to New York State’s clean energy goals,” said spokesperson for the venture Amy Varghese. “We look forward to continuing our conversations with the New York Power Authority to advance renewable energy projects that support the state’s climate action targets.” The Power Authority is also negotiating with NextEra for four solar projects, all of which appear to have previously held NYSERDA contracts. That seems to include the North Side Energy Center, based on the size and location of the project. The 180 megawatt large-scale solar project was twice rejected by the state’s siting board under the Article 10 process due to significant impacts on wetlands. “Our ongoing due diligence review for each project includes evaluation of permitting and environmental factors. NYPA and co-developers may explore mitigation measures, if necessary,” Craig said in response to a question about why NYPA would pursue what appears to be a project with permitting challenges. NYPA is also in talks with solar developers CS Energy and ConnectGen/Repsol. At least seven of the projects NYPA is eyeing appear to already have permits in place. But there are still major challenges ahead for NYPA to make the economics of the projects work. NYPA officials have been clear they won’t develop money-losing projects since they’re committed to maintaining a pristine bond rating and responsibly managing their assets. The draft renewables plan underscores this issue, saying that new renewables are only expected to earn $50 per megawatt hour annually from the energy markets for the “foreseeable future.” The cost of new solar is at least $100 per megawatt hour, according to NYPA’s market intelligence. So NYPA sees two main options. It could have customers pay a premium for new renewables through a power purchase agreement — the authority says it is in talks with the state Office of General Services, which is required under an executive order to supply all its New York City facilities with 100 percent renewables by 2025, and the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey about opportunities to contract for renewables. (That approach was not successful in the past, when NYPA announced deals with new renewables but then ultimately opted not to move forward.) Or, NYPA could seek to have ratepayers statewide subsidize its renewables through NYSERDA’s renewable energy credit procurement. The NYPA board approved a new entity to oversee renewable development with an initial investment of $100 million. The draft plan listing these renewable projects is out for public comment now with several hearings planned in November. For the leading group that pressured Gov. Kathy Hochul and lawmakers to allow NYPA additional authority to build new renewables, the 3.5 gigawatts has already fallen short. The Public Power New York coalition, which is backed by the New York City Democratic Socialists of America, wants NYPA to pursue building at least 15 gigawatts of new renewables. They’re concerned about attrition from the proposed 3.5 gigawatt portfolio. “Amidst unprecedented Hurricanes Helene and Milton and climate devastation across the globe, we call on NYPA to go back to the drawing board and come back with a plan that fully utilizes the most powerful tool we have to get on track building public renewables,” the group wrote in a statement. NYPA officials said they’re still working on the project portfolio and acknowledged there’s likely to be attrition. “There’s going to be more to come,” NYPA President and CEO Justin Driscoll said at Tuesday’s board meeting. “We’re in due diligence with all these projects, so that means we’re negotiating terms — sometimes for land, sometimes for partnership opportunities, sometimes for takeover opportunities.” — Marie J. French PSE&G RATES TO GO UP: The New Jersey Board of Public Utilities moved its Wednesday morning meeting to the Department of Environmental Protection building because of a power outage in the BPU offices, which was apparently the result of internal facility issues. Then board members voted unanimously to increase base rates for PSE&G gas and electric customers by 7 percent, or about $15 a month — $8.93 a month for typical residential electric customers and $6.54 per month for gas customers. Annually, the increase amounts to close to $230 more a year. The new rates take effect Oct. 15. PSE&G said the base rate increase was the first since 2018 and “represents less than half the rate of inflation during that time.” The utility also said the increase follows the BPU’s approval of certain rate changes that just went into effect Oct. 1, including a 5 percent reduction in PSE&G gas bills, which means the overall change result of the BPU’s action on Wednesday means an $11 per month increase, rather than $15. “We remain focused on managing costs while also working to deliver the level of service our customers expect,” PSE&G President Kim Hanemann said in a statement. “This agreement recognizes the much-needed investments in our system that will both improve resiliency and help prepare us for the future. I want to acknowledge the BPU for their consideration and their approval of this settlement.” The board’s decision was based on a stipulation previously approved by an administrative law judge for PSE&G’s base rate case, which includes a 9.6 percent return on equity, along with recovery of storm costs and debt- and tax-related changes. It is one of several rate increases that have prompted increased scrutiny of utilities and the BPU. At a legislative hearing last week, ratepayer advocate Brian Lipman noted the average PSE&G customer had seen rate increases of more than $6 per month from summer 2023 to this summer — a figure that doesn’t account for higher, weather-related usage this summer. Three of the four board members made comments in defense of their vote. “We understand that no one likes to see their bills go up and their rates go up, that’s why we have so many assistance programs,” BPU President Christine Guhl-Sadovy said. Zenon Christodoulou said the board does everything it can to keep rates in check and pointed out there are many assistance programs. “Infrastructure costs money and we need to keep investing in this infrastructure to make sure we don’t have issues and outages,” board member Michael Bange said. — Ry Rivard CLEAN ENERGY CONFLICT: The concern about near-term costs for New York’s support for new renewable energy projects led New York City Mayor Eric Adams’ administration and one key group of energy users that includes the state’s university system to urge caution in comments on the first review of the Clean Energy Standard. The program is supposed to achieve 70 percent renewable electricity by 2030 — but likely won’t , according to state agencies. NYSERDA and the Department of Public Service staff have proposed a number of changes to procurements of new renewables, including more flexibility to alter prices and greater emphasis on viability of projects. Generally, environmental groups and renewable developers were supportive of many of the proposed changes with some minor caveats. They urged the state to stick with the 70 percent goal and argued it was too early to abandon the 2030 goal enshrined in state law. “Moving the goalposts now would be a short-sighted retreat from this challenge that sends a troubling signal to developers that the state is not fully committed to its clean energy or climate commitments,” wrote the Sierra Club and Natural Resources Defense Council in joint comments. The clean energy industry sought to emphasize this risk for policymakers. “If New York takes steps now to relax its goals in the face of adversity, the signal that will send to the industry will sever investors’ already wavering confidence, and the faltering of the large-scale industry in the state will make any future achievement of those goals a nearly impossible challenge,” wrote CS Energy in comments. There does appear to be some difference among developers on how to define costs for renewable projects in the procurement process — with at least a couple of developers, EDF Renewables and Liberty Renewables, the onshore wind arm of Copenhagen Infrastructure Partners, expressing openness to NYSERDA considering more than just bid price. NYSERDA should “reframe procurement processes to consider not only cost and specific project pricing but also the net societal return on investment,” wrote EDF REnewables in its comments. Other developers had concerns about a “black box” adjustment to bid prices by NYSERDA’s experts creating more uncertainty for developers. But for energy consumer groups the complete lack of updated cost information — DPS hasn’t issued a report on costs from the state’s climate law for ratepayers since July 2023 and NYSERDA has declined to release cost information on renewable energy projects awarded in April until the contracts are finalized — spurred pushback from Multiple Intervenors, which represents large energy users including Wegmans and the State University of New York system; New York City; the Public Utility Law Project; and the New York Energy Consumers Council, which represents property owners in New York City including colleges, government agencies and prominent buildings like Rockefeller Center. Multiple Intervenors, which has historically raised concerns about rising energy costs from the array of clean energy programs utility ratepayers have been tapped to fund, ripped New York state for its historic failure to achieve clean energy targets. The state has typically just raised its renewable target and moved out the deadline as it becomes clear policies aren’t matching up to rhetoric. The group calls for the Public Service Commission to identify more reasonable renewable goals, consider different approaches to hit it, analyze rate impacts and quantify the costs and benefits of a renewable goal. “The ‘solution’ is not to throw even more customer money at the problem without a fresh evaluation of the path forward,” Multiple Intervenor’s lawyers wrote in comments. “New York needs a reset; the Commission should implement one.” New York City’s lawyers, while conveniently failing to acknowledge the city is not on track to hit its own near-term emissions reduction goals, urged the state to forge ahead “expeditiously” — but not without considering costs. The comments cite Gov. Kathy Hochul’s focus on costs to consumers. “It is important to achieve the State’s policy goals, but doing so at any cost is not acceptable,” the comments state. New York City urges limits on the flexibility for NYSERDA to adjust prices and backs a review by the commission of any such adjustments. The New York Energy Consumers Council hammers the lack of cost information in the report and requests “forward-looking cost estimates” for the 70 percent renewable program and other climate law goals be provided. “The potential costs to ratepayers is not, and should not be treated at any time as, a secondary or collateral issue,” the group wrote. The Public Utility Law Project, espousing support for the climate law and general openness to the changes proposed by state agency staff, nevertheless notes that financially vulnerable customers “must be shielded from bearing the brunt of the financial burden associated with this transition.” Some environmental groups paid some attention to cost issues for the program. Sierra Club and NRDC noted that Maryland has state agencies enter agreements to buy offshore wind and suggested policymakers should look at options like that. Earthjustice and several allied groups also raised concerns about the impact of large energy users, particularly data centers and cryptocurrency miners, on the state’s goals. “These energy-intensive industries and companies must be better regulated to prevent extraordinary levels of energy consumption and be required to pay their fair share for electricity and for the State’s efforts to meet our renewable energy targets,” the groups wrote in comment. “If we care about New Yorkers’ health and cost of living, this issue must be addressed.” Additional load from cryptocurrency mining, data centers — and economic development priorities like high-tech manufacturing — is a major driver of the higher energy demand forecast driving the forecasted shortfall in achieving the state’s target. This is just the first round of comments on this key process to adjust the state’s program to procure renewables. Reply comments were due Oct. 11. — Marie J. French CYBERATTACK STUNS AMERICAN WATER, PAUSES BILLING: American Water, one of the nation’s largest private water companies and the water utility for 2.8 million New Jersey residents, will be pausing billing until further notice following the discovery of “unauthorized activity” in the company’s computer networks and systems. The company said on its website that its water remains safe to drink and it told investors that it “currently believes that none of its water or wastewater facilities or operations have been negatively impacted by this incident.” The company said it discovered the intrusion on Oct. 3. “Our dedicated team of professionals are working around the clock to investigate the nature and scope of the incident,” the company said on its website. In a financial filing, the company said it has notified law enforcement and is coordinating with them. The company is the latest water or wastewater utility to be hit by cybersecurity incidents. Moody’s Ratings said American Water has made beneficial investments in its cybersecurity and that the rating agency doesn’t expect a material impact. But, there remains risk across the sector. “The cyber incident at American Water underscores the risks within the water and wastewater sector,” Edna Marinelarena, a Moody’s assistant vice president, said in a comment sent to reporters. “From a credit perspective, we are primarily focused on operations, but we also see risks with customer relations, increased regulatory scrutiny, unexpected demands on liquidity and other reputational matters.” — Ry Rivard ICYMI: NUCLEAR COMMENT DEADLINE EXTENDED: The deadline to weigh in on New York’s “draft blueprint” for advanced nuclear has been pushed back past the election. Comments were originally due Oct. 7 but the deadline was extended to Nov. 8. Both key Democratic lawmakers — Environmental Conservation Committee Chairs Sen. Pete Harckham and Assemblymember Deborah Glick — and an environmental group opposed to subsidizing new (and existing) nuclear claimed credit for the delay. “The final Blueprint for Consideration of Advanced Nuclear Technologies is expected to be published in the coming months and will outline additional public engagement activities on the issues addressed in the Blueprint,” NYSERDA’s announcement of the additional time said. Harckham and Glick announced they’d sent a letter urging a longer comment period. The blueprint is a “critical policy decision with lasting implications,” Harckham said in a statement. “Due to the long lifespan of certain radioactive materials, the choices made today will impact generations to come. Given the complexity and significance of this issue, New Yorkers deserve a voice.” The Alliance for Green Energy Economy, which opposes ongoing subsidies for the upstate nuclear plants and favors investments in renewables over any support for nascent nuclear technologies, also took credit for opposing the blueprint and getting a delay. The groups said the process has been rushed. — Marie J. French NYPA’S RENEWABLE PLAN: After years of pushing by Democratic lawmakers and public power advocates, the New York Power Authority released a plan to generate 3.5 gigawatts of renewable energy in coming years. The draft renewables strategic plan — required by last year’s state budget bill and to be finalized in early 2025 — is a major step for the authority, which initially resisted calls to build renewable energy. Now the authority is eyeing 40 different renewable energy projects, mostly solar but also battery storage and land-based wind. Some projects would be built in partnership with other developers and some the authority would develop on its own. The agency currently has a 6-gigawatt portfolio, mostly hydropower, that provides more than a fifth of the state’s power, so the new projects would represent a 50 percent increase in capacity and also be the biggest wave of new generation constructed by the authority since a series of gas-fired peaker plants a few decades ago that it now faces pressure to retire. In the 17 months since last year’s state budget was signed, the authority has been working to set up a whole new business department to do the necessary work required by lawmakers. NYPA describes the dozens of projects it’s eyeing now as a first tranche, with more to come. There is no immediate estimate of ratepayer impacts, because it will take a while to work out which projects get built and who pays for them, since NYPA may sell some power into the market, need NYSERDA approval for renewable energy credits or have power purchase agreements with specific customers. Still, some of the projects could be completed next year. The board is expected to vote on a final plan in January. — Ry Rivard P3 NJ: The New Jersey Senate budget committee advanced a bill Monday to create a statewide policy for energy-related public-private partnerships and a financing program overseen by the state’s infrastructure bank. The bill, S3415, is meant to help state and local governments pay for energy generation and efficiency projects in a challenging budget environment. Business groups support the bill, but environmental groups are concerned that it could help build fossil fuel projects. They also have process concerns, too. The bill puts the New Jersey Infrastructure Bank — a creature of the state treasury department — in charge of helping to vet projects, not the Board of Public Utilities. And the bill was voted on by the budget committee without going through the Senate’s energy and environment committee. The vice chair of the environment committee, state Sen. Linda Greenstein, said Monday she didn’t really know about the bill before the budget committee took it up. One of the bill’s supporters, Steve Goldenberg, a lobbyist who represents the New Jersey Distributed Generation Coalition, said the idea had its origins with the coalition. “This is not the first rodeo for this bill,” he said in an interview. A previous version of the bill passed several years ago and was pocket-vetoed by Gov. Phil Murphy. In a summary of the bill he prepared, Goldenberg said that public-private partnerships “will enable the state to pursue long-overdue energy projects” to upgrade and harden energy infrastructure, reduce demand, provide for cleaner energy and stimulate the economy. — Ry Rivard
| 
