It's a noun, not a verb.
When Transource was faced with the reality that its Independence Energy Connection (also known as "Projects b2743 & b2752" and "Market Efficiency Project 9A" in PJM parlance) did not provide much benefit to the geographic area sacrificed for the new transmission lines, it re-wrote its project "Fact Sheet" to gloss over this shortcoming.
Transource now says:
When Transource was faced with the reality that its Independence Energy Connection (also known as "Projects b2743 & b2752" and "Market Efficiency Project 9A" in PJM parlance) did not provide much benefit to the geographic area sacrificed for the new transmission lines, it re-wrote its project "Fact Sheet" to gloss over this shortcoming.
Transource now says:
Who benefits from the project? For this project, PJM projects $622 million in cost savings for consumers in 10 power zones. Those zones are listed below and displayed on the map to the right. Generally speaking, when low-cost electricity is introduced into the market, it helps drive the overall competitiveness of the electric grid for all power zones.
Benefiting Power Zones Identified by PJM:
American Electric Power Co., Inc, Allegheny Power Systems, Baltimore Gas & Electric, ComEd, Dayton Power and Light Company, Duke Energy Ohio and Kentucky, Duquesne Light, Dominion, East Kentucky Power Cooperative, Potomac Electric Power Company.
The high-voltage electric grid operates across towns, counties and state boundaries. As such, the benefit of this project is not confined
to geographical boundaries. Customer-driven improvement projects in one area of the grid can benefit customers on another part of the electric grid. For example, recent improvements made in Indiana and Westmoreland counties, more than 100 miles away, improved how the grid operates in York County.
And here is the power zone map supplied by Transource.
Transource wants the public affected by this project to believe that benefits will be spread evenly over all power zones.
But that is not the case. Transource must have run out of room because it did not also supply the Cost Responsibility percentages for the power zones on its map. Or maybe they purposely didn't include it because it did not support their propaganda narrative.
One of the most basic rules of assigning cost responsibility for new transmission projects is that cost must be commensurate with benefit. Therefore, the first step to assigning costs to certain zones is to determine benefit for each zone. PJM did that analysis and posted its cost responsibility assignments here.
But that is not the case. Transource must have run out of room because it did not also supply the Cost Responsibility percentages for the power zones on its map. Or maybe they purposely didn't include it because it did not support their propaganda narrative.
One of the most basic rules of assigning cost responsibility for new transmission projects is that cost must be commensurate with benefit. Therefore, the first step to assigning costs to certain zones is to determine benefit for each zone. PJM did that analysis and posted its cost responsibility assignments here.
Since cost is directly proportional to benefit, you may interpret this chart to show the percentage of benefit to each power zone.
- AEP zone = 6.56%
- APS zone = 8.73%
- BGE zone = 19.73%
- ComEd zone = 2.16%
- ConEd zone = 0.06%
- Dayton zone = 0.59%
- DEOK zone = 1.02%
- DL zone = 0.01%
- Dominion zone = 39.92%
- EKPC zone = 0.45%
- PEPCO zone = 20.87%
If you add up the BGE (Baltimore Gas & Electric), Dominion (Northern Virginia) and PEPCO (Washington, DC) zones, you will get 80.52%. That means that 80.52% of the benefits of this project will be confined to those zones. Baltimore, Northern Virginia and Washington, DC, will receive more than 80% of the benefit from this project.
There will be no new transmission lines in Baltimore, Northern Virginia or Washington, DC (oh, the horrors, the horrors!). If PJM tried to build new transmission in these urban areas, even to lower prices by a few cents per year, the pushback would be enormous. Instead, PJM (and Transource) have moved the burden of new transmission lines into the APS zone (8.73% of project benefit) and Metropolitan Edison Co. zone (ZERO percent of project benefit). The APS zone will receive just 8% of the $622M benefit, but it will shoulder 100% of the project burden. In the case of MetEd, the people will shoulder 100% of project burden in exchange for... NO BENEFIT WHATSOEVER.
So, when Transource says that everyone benefits, that's just not true. Some benefit more than others. And the ones receiving the lion's share of benefit from this project are people who have sacrificed absolutely nothing in exchange for saving a few pennies on their electric bill.
As well, "generally speaking" providing new pathways for power exports from a constrained area serves to raise prices for the previously constrained area. If an area is flooded with cheap power that has no where else to go, competition is at work to keep prices at the lowest possible. Once the area is no longer constrained, the area must now compete for pricing with new areas where power is more expensive. If a generator can sell its power at double the price in Baltimore, it has no incentive to compete with other suppliers to keep prices low in the previously constrained area. Instead, power prices in the previously constrained area will rise, becoming competitive with prices in Baltimore. Market efficiency transmission projects perform a leveling of prices across certain regions between source (generation) and sink (power users). Transource forgot to tell you this, as well.
Baltimore, Northern Virginia and Washington, DC, will receive more than 80% of the power savings from this project. Transource has lied through omission.
Hmm... maybe it is a verb after all.
There will be no new transmission lines in Baltimore, Northern Virginia or Washington, DC (oh, the horrors, the horrors!). If PJM tried to build new transmission in these urban areas, even to lower prices by a few cents per year, the pushback would be enormous. Instead, PJM (and Transource) have moved the burden of new transmission lines into the APS zone (8.73% of project benefit) and Metropolitan Edison Co. zone (ZERO percent of project benefit). The APS zone will receive just 8% of the $622M benefit, but it will shoulder 100% of the project burden. In the case of MetEd, the people will shoulder 100% of project burden in exchange for... NO BENEFIT WHATSOEVER.
So, when Transource says that everyone benefits, that's just not true. Some benefit more than others. And the ones receiving the lion's share of benefit from this project are people who have sacrificed absolutely nothing in exchange for saving a few pennies on their electric bill.
As well, "generally speaking" providing new pathways for power exports from a constrained area serves to raise prices for the previously constrained area. If an area is flooded with cheap power that has no where else to go, competition is at work to keep prices at the lowest possible. Once the area is no longer constrained, the area must now compete for pricing with new areas where power is more expensive. If a generator can sell its power at double the price in Baltimore, it has no incentive to compete with other suppliers to keep prices low in the previously constrained area. Instead, power prices in the previously constrained area will rise, becoming competitive with prices in Baltimore. Market efficiency transmission projects perform a leveling of prices across certain regions between source (generation) and sink (power users). Transource forgot to tell you this, as well.
Baltimore, Northern Virginia and Washington, DC, will receive more than 80% of the power savings from this project. Transource has lied through omission.
Hmm... maybe it is a verb after all.
RSS Feed