New York Goes Full Central Planning For The Electricity Sector
“ Here in New York State, we have an electricity system that, as of this moment, is functioning just fine.”
Manhattan Contrarian
New York Goes Full Central Planning For The Electricity Sector
April 19, 2023/ Francis Menton
Here in New York State, we have an electricity system that, as of this moment, is functioning just fine. Granted, we pay more for the electricity than we should — probably in the range of 50% or more extra — mainly because we have banned the exploitation of our own abundant natural gas resources from the Marcellus and Utica shale formations in the upstate areas. And granted also that we just in 2020 and 2021 closed the two big nuclear reactors at Indian Point, about 40 miles north of New York City, which had supplied more than 25% of the City’s power. (We immediately replaced those nuclear plants with two brand new natural gas power plants of almost equivalent capacity, and with those additions the current system continues to work with a high degree of reliability. Building those new gas plants was our last rational act before peak environmental insanity kicked in.)
It is not news that our existing, functional electricity system grievously offends the sensibilities of environmental activists, particularly due to its high reliance on natural gas to generate the power. By our Climate Change and Community Protection Act of 2019 (Climate Act), the legislature has decreed that we are to have a rapid transition to “net zero” carbon emissions, first in the electricity sector, and then for the entire economy. No feasibility study or demonstration project for us! The only option is Full Speed Ahead, without a clue as to whether this will work or not.
The free markets have figured out that natural gas is the current low-cost way to make incremental electricity; thus, the energy transition does not budge without government command and massive subsidies. That will not stop us. Forget what the markets are clearly telling us. It’s time for the markets to take their orders from the politicians and the bureaucrats. We will go Full Central Planning. Has that ever proved to be a problem anywhere in the past? Not that anyone here seems to recognize.
As previously discussed in this post of December 29, 2021, the Climate Act ordered up a Climate Action Council, and directed said Council to produce a Scoping Plan to show us the path forward to net zero utopia. The Council was stacked with environmental activists and sorely lacking in anyone with expertise in how the energy system actually works. A Scoping Plan was duly produced— more than 300 pages of text and another 400+ of appendices. In that December 2021 post I characterized the Scoping Plan (then in near-final draft form) as “preposterous” and “amateurish,” essentially taking the approach of ordering up the end result and directing the little people to figure out the engineering details. Sample quote: “The authors are like a parody version of King Canute, who actually believe that when they order the tide to stop rising, it will obey.”
More recently, it has been brought to my attention that other documents exist supposedly giving more detail as to how New York is going to accomplish the net zero transition. First, daughter (and MC contributor) Jane participated in a conference call among board members of Queens co-ops, attended by Donovan Richards, the Queens Borough President. The purpose of the call was to present concerns about whether the grid would be adequate to support the change to electric heat that is being forced on the co-ops by a New York City statute. According to Jane, Richards and his staff pooh-poohed the idea that grid adequacy might pose any problem. To allay any concerns, they referred Jane and her co-board members to a January 2022 Report issued by the electric utility Con Edison, with the title “An Integrated View of Our Energy System through 2050.”
Separately, reader Bill Ponton refers me to another Report, this one put out in January 2021 by the New York Public Service Commission and the NYS Energy Research and Development Authority, with the title “Initial Report on the Power Grid Study.” (At that link there is a further link where you can download a pdf of the full Report.)
Let me start with a few thoughts on the Con Edison Report. It is lots of verbiage and plenty of charts and graphs. And it is more or less exactly what you would expect if you think for say, one minute, about what position Con Edison might take. As a deeply regulated entity, they are completely required to affirm the directives and applaud the wisdom of their government overlords. But more than that, they are clearly salivating over the prospect of getting to make billions of dollars of new investments, all of which will earn a guaranteed, regulated rate of return for their investors — and if we are really, really lucky, the end result will be that we get the exact same electricity for much higher cost. If we aren’t so lucky, we will get much less reliable electricity for the much higher cost. The cost factor is played down throughout the Report, and we never get any meaningful quantification.
But all the verbiage and charts and graphs mainly have the purpose of obscuring the fact that Con Ed does not take responsibility for making sure that there is enough electricity availability to supply customer demand on the grid. That’s somebody else’s job.
To set the tone, here is a quote from page 1:
[W]e are committed to being the next-generation, clean energy company that our customers deserve and expect. We will play a critical role in delivering on the ambitious climate and clean energy goals set by New York State and New York City, including reaching net-zero greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 2050. In addition, the need for safe, reliable, and secure energy infrastructure remains paramount.
OK, where in there did you say that you take responsibility for there being enough electricity to meet demand?
Cost barely gets mentioned in the introductory section. It finally turns up in the last paragraph. Here’s how they spin it:
We recognize this transition to a net-zero GHG emissions energy system will require significant investment. We seek to make investments that achieve the goals of this transition as cost- effectively as possible, which necessitates growing our electric system while maintaining our gas and steam systems to achieve clean energy goals.
In other words, whoo-boy is there a lot of money for us to make here!
But how about the question of who is going to supply the electricity? Buried in a section on “Our History” (page 9), we find this:
We primarily own transmission and distribution assets and no generation aside from our steam co-generation.
Oh, right, Con Ed got out of the generation business over the course of the past several decades. Somebody else will be building all of those new wind turbines and solar panels. Or maybe they won’t. Not our business. On page 3 we get a table of all of the fantastic new renewable generation to come:
Up to 41 GW of utility scale solar generation from across New York State
Up to 19.4 GW of offshore wind from the Atlantic Ocean
Up to 13.8 GW of onshore wind from upstate New York
3.5 GW of renewable hydropower from Canada
And how much of that do you take responsibility for?
We have developed plans to build the necessary electric transmission and distribution infrastructure by 2050 to . . . [I]nterconnect and balance new renewable generation from [these new renewable generators].
In other words, it’s not our job to actually build the things, let alone decide how many of them to build or where. Our job is “interconnection” and “balance.” Providing the actual generation capacity is the job of the Central Planners — people with no profit motive and whose jobs are not on the line if the whole thing turns out not to work. Are they doing the job? No comment.
And how about the trillions of dollars worth of energy storage that will be needed when the sun doesn’t shine and the wind doesn’t blow? See if you can decode this word salad:
We have developed plans to build the necessary electric transmission and distribution infrastructure by 2050 to . . . [d]evelop and facilitate up to 12.6 GW of energy storage through direct utility investments and customer programs at customer and utility scales.
Where even to start? “12.6 GW” of storage? They don’t even know the correct units to discuss this issue. If these are four-hour duration lithium ion batteries (unspecified, but what else could they be talking about?), that will give you 50.4 GWh of storage — enough to cover New York State for a couple of hours at most of low sun and wind. Competent calculations indicate a storage requirement of more like 20 to 30 days of storage to deal with the seasonality of the sun and wind. So this is at best a small fraction of one percent of what will be needed to back up the solar/wind grid of the future.
But what does Con Ed care? They’re not actually saying here that they are taking responsibility for making the new system work, let alone even providing the batteries themselves. They’re only saying that they have “developed plans” to “facilitate” the storage, which could occur either through “utility investments” or “customer programs.” In other words, I guess, hey sucker, use your electric car battery to power the house when the grid goes down.
Yes, this is what the Borough President of Queens is offering up to reassure his constituents that they have nothing to worry about as our government simultaneously shuts down all electricity generation that works and compels them to go all electric to heat their homes.
In the next post I’ll offer some observations from Bill Ponton on the NYSERDA grid study.
Energy And The Environment, New York, Sustainability
5 Likes
Share
Posted by Francis Menton.
COMMENTS (10)
Newest First Oldest First Newest First Most Liked Least Liked
Preview Post Comment…
John Galt III 9 minutes ago · 0 Likes
New York City is run by Communists. Communists are idiots. If you live in NYC your best option if your are remotely sane is to get the hell out. I was born in Manhattan and my family built part of New York: Kew Gardens and Richmond Hill in the Queens. We have all left.
When you do leave, do your homework and stay away from Communist run cities in other states. Find the Red State of your choice, pick a smaller town or city that works - a state that is not building 55,000 windmills, believes in unicorns and that Joe Biden is smart.
Or stay and be miserable. As they say, you can vote the Communists in, but then you have to shoot your way out.
The national divorce continues apace.
Frank 11 minutes ago · 0 Likes
Mr. Merton, you really need to get yourself and your family out of the dying husk of a New York State totally dominated by NYC. When the fall of the house of cards comes, it will do great damage to anyone who is still there, and a lot of others as well. Get far, far away.
bob sykes 2 hours ago · 1 Like
So, if Russia/China/India can hang together for another decade, their Western Problem will simply go away of its own accord.
Will they bother to send us governors to clean up our mess, or will they adopt a policy of malign neglect?
Ed Reid 25 minutes ago · 0 Likes
China would like send us commissars to tell us how to exist in our mess.
Diogenes 4 hours ago · 0 Likes
Ah ha!
My crystal ball shows enormous amounts of finger-pointing and blame-shifting in New York's future.
It's classic bureaucrat behavior: nobody has any responsibility and nobody is ever held to account.
Ed Reid 24 minutes ago · 0 Likes
The "blame game" is already afoot at the federal level.
E Olson 4 hours ago · 1 Like
"It's classic bureaucrat behavior: nobody has any responsibility and nobody is ever held to account."
It really wouldn't be fair to hold dedicated public servants to account, because any failure that occurs in their assigned mission is always the result of inadequate budgets, insufficient regulatory power, inadequate staffing levels and/or staffing lacking in sufficient strength through diversity, or the irrational zealotry of various enemies of the people who insist on maintaining troublesome Constitutional rights, blind justice before the law, or who just plain don't understand that socialism is good for them. In other words, the sources of failure are totally out of the control of public servants, especially those hired on the basis on pigment, plumbing, and Leftist ideology.
Ed Reid29 minutes ago · 0 Likes
You didn't mention "market failure", which would place a target on ConEd's back.
I think this puts the lie to the old Johnny Carson line: "You can fool all of the people some of the time and some of the people all of the time, but you can't Con Ed. ;-)
E Olson 7 hours ago · 1 Like
ConEd writes: "[W]e are committed to being the next-generation, clean energy company that our customers deserve and expect."
It would be a very interesting research project to undertake to find out what ConEd customers truly expect from their electricity supplier. For example, if given the choice between the following two sources of electricity, what percent of ConEd customers would choose:
Option 1: Mixture of nuclear (50%), natural gas (30%), and hydro (20%) sourced electricity. This system will be 99% reliable, which means electricity will be disrupted for a few seconds to few hours up to 4 days per year, will cost 12 to 15 cents per kWh, and generate 144g CO2 equivalent emissions per kWh.
Option 2: 100% renewable with 75% wind and 25% solar sourced electricity. This system will be 90% reliable, which means electricity supply will be disrupted for a few seconds to few hours approximately 37 days per year, the electricity will cost 35 to 50 cents per kWh (about 3 times current levels), and generate 20g CO2 equivalent emissions per kWh.
My guess is that 99% of customers would choose option 1, and the other 1% of customers would lie and say they would choose option 2, but then when they actually had to pay for it would also choose option 1.
Ed Reid 27 minutes ago · 0 Likes
Altruism fails when it costs.
Subscribe
Sign up with your email address to receive every new post from the Manhattan Contrarian in your inbox.
SUBSCRIBE
We respect your privacy. No tracking. No ads.
Permission to use content on this site is hereby granted freely to all, provided that any such use is accompanied by attribution and link.
Daughter Jane Menton has become a regular contributor. Watch for her byline. I hope you enjoy her posts.
Comments are welcome and encouraged on this website. However, I reserve the right to delete any comment that I deem inappropriate for any reason.
Upcoming event of interest:
On Thursday, March 30, 2023, the Soho Forum will host a debate of the resolution “Upward mobility for black Americans lies in rejecting the policies of progressive government, while making the most of the opportunities offered by American society.”
For the affirmative: Jason Riley, Manhattan Institute Senior Fellow.
For the negative: NYU Professor Nikhil Singh
This is an in person event to be held at the Sheen Center, 18 Bleecker Street in lower Manhattan. Doors open 6:00 PM, event begins 6:30 PM. Go here for tickets.
If you want to support this website:
From time to time readers ask how they can support this website. The site itself does not need or accept outside financial support. However, I encourage support of the Global Warming Policy Foundation. Full disclosure: I am on the Board, and am the President, of the American Friends affiliate of this organization. To learn more about the organization, you can go to its website here. To make a contribution, you can go to its “donate” page here. If you are a U.S. taxpayer and would like to make a U.S. tax deductible contribution to the American Friends, go to this link. If you are considering a contribution, please note that neither the GWPF nor its American Friends affiliate accepts gifts from energy businesses, or from anyone with a significant interest in an energy business.
More from the Manhattan Contrarian:
Recent posts:
New York Goes Full Central Planning For The Electricity Sector
11 HOURS AGO
3 DAYS AGO
Oral Argument In CHECC v. EPA: The Issue Of Standing
5 DAYS AGO
Reality Versus The Tesla Energy Report, Part II
A WEEK AGO
Tesla's Entry Into The Net Zero Game: "Sustainable Energy For All Of Earth"
A WEEK AGO
Manhattan Contrarian - Economic, Political & Legal Commentary RSS