Posts: 11,251
Threads: 765
Joined: Sep 2012
HELCO has a large incentive to get rid of its power production plants and just focus on transmission.
...
Source to back up above statement Leilanidude ?
Solar panels, wind, and geothermal.
“We’ve got to be as clear-headed about human beings as possible, because we are still each other’s only hope,” James Baldwin to Margaret Mead in the book A Rap On Race
"I'm at that stage in life where I stay out of discussions. Even if you say 1+1=5, you're right - have fun." - Keanu Reeves
Posts: 4,331
Threads: 100
Joined: Mar 2014
No need for a "source". Electric companies all over the US have been going this route for years. Why didn't HELCO build the geothermal plant? How about that plant North of Hilo that is to burn the eucalyptus trees to make electricity?
How about all of the other wild ideas for renewable energy that have been going on in Hawaii? HELCO wants someone else to take the risk of building/operating the plants. When HELCO goes before the PUC and says, "we need additional generating capacity", the PUC would say "OK, but you cannot raise rates to build the plant." If the plant doesn't make it to production or has some sort of engineering issue, HELCO is on the hook for the $.
Has HELCO built any additional generation facilities themselves? Nope. They "partner" with 3rd party companies that will design/build and then HELCO makes an agreement to purchase the electricity for a negotiated cost. HELCO gets renewable power for a set price without the risk. HELCO can say to the PUC, "See what this renewable electricity costs us to buy? We need to sell it for $ more than what we are paying for it."
Posts: 1,858
Threads: 46
Joined: Apr 2015
quote:
Originally posted by leilanidude
No need for a "source". Electric companies all over the US have been going this route for years. Why didn't HELCO build the geothermal plant? How about that plant North of Hilo that is to burn the eucalyptus trees to make electricity?
How about all of the other wild ideas for renewable energy that have been going on in Hawaii? HELCO wants someone else to take the risk of building/operating the plants. When HELCO goes before the PUC and says, "we need additional generating capacity", the PUC would say "OK, but you cannot raise rates to build the plant." If the plant doesn't make it to production or has some sort of engineering issue, HELCO is on the hook for the $.
Has HELCO built any additional generation facilities themselves? Nope. They "partner" with 3rd party companies that will design/build and then HELCO makes an agreement to purchase the electricity for a negotiated cost. HELCO gets renewable power for a set price without the risk. HELCO can say to the PUC, "See what this renewable electricity costs us to buy? We need to sell it for $ more than what we are paying for it."
Exactly why the utilities should never have been allowed to be privatized. Now we are at the mercy of the board and the shareholders. Thank god for batteries.
Posts: 4,331
Threads: 100
Joined: Mar 2014
What is really interesting is that NextEra has been one of the few utilities going the opposite way: they own and operate not only the generation but also the transmission lines. This would have saved us poor consumers big $ on our electric bills, but the PUC didn't understand the issue. NextEra also is heavily investing in renewables since they can then get the tax credits. Otherwise, renewable simply costs too much.
Posts: 785
Threads: 6
Joined: Apr 2012
quote:
Originally posted by leilanidude
Why didn't HELCO build the geothermal plant? How about that plant North of Hilo that is to burn the eucalyptus trees to make electricity?
Has HELCO built any additional generation facilities themselves? Nope. They "partner" with 3rd party companies that will design/build and then HELCO makes an agreement to purchase the electricity for a negotiated cost. HELCO gets renewable power for a set price without the risk. HELCO can say to the PUC, "See what this renewable electricity costs us to buy? We need to sell it for $ more than what we are paying for it."
I don't disagree but I would offer a couple of points l-dude: HELCO did build a power plant a while back - the Kona diesel-fired plant, I think, was the last one they built. Took them more than a decade to get it installed due to all the whining and obstruction of the community over there. Why would they go the expense and risk of doing that again? The regulatory system is broken - the only people who are willing to take a run at it are completely naive people who have no clue how tortuous the regulatory system is in this state (think the Ka'u biofuel plant and the group trying to develop biomass combustion at the old HCPC site). All this whinging about investors making megabucks is nonsense - far more investment money has been lost on failed efforts to develop renewables and we the rate payers get to pay for the few that make it through the system at tremendous cost.
I reckon that we'll have to see a collapse of the generation system before the regulatory system changes - remember the rolling blackouts before PGV got up and running? (And my opinion is that Harry Kim was largely responsible for that situation - so maybe we can look forward to seeing more of those under his coming rule...)
Posts: 14,142
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
NextEra also is heavily investing in renewables since they can then get the tax credits. Otherwise, renewable simply costs too much.
Renewable only appears more expensive because "conventional" generation gets a free pass on the externalities. The right answer isn't to subsidize renewables, but to surcharge anything that burns oil.
Posts: 14,142
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
all the whining and obstruction of the community
Ironically, the "community" has the same reaction to any increase in generation capacity, whether or not it's "renewable".
The regulatory system is broken
Which problem incurs a cost for any business in Hawaii -- even after it's been sold to new owners.
remember the rolling blackouts
Solar is a bit cheaper now, possibly the public reaction will be different.
Posts: 4,331
Threads: 100
Joined: Mar 2014
Renewable only appears more expensive because "conventional" generation gets a free pass on the externalities. The right answer isn't to subsidize renewables, but to surcharge anything that burns oil.
----
That would raise the cost of electricity to the consumer...
Another error the PUC made was the refusal to allow for LNG (liquid natural gas)to be used here. It is vastly cheaper than oil/bunker fuel, burns amazingly clean and presents less of a hazard in the event of a spill than oil does. Their excuse was that they felt it would only be a transitional fuel until more renewables were available. Hello! LNG IS a renewable. The earth is making more of it every day. A new find was announced last week in West Texas that has enough natural gas to last the entire US 20+ years, all by itself.
Posts: 14,142
Threads: 424
Joined: Aug 2012
That would raise the cost of electricity to the consumer...
Yes, as well it should; the bunker fuel is massively subsidized, even more than the solar panels.
Posts: 1,093
Threads: 51
Joined: Jan 2014
quote:
Originally posted by leilanidude
Renewable only appears more expensive because "conventional" generation gets a free pass on the externalities. The right answer isn't to subsidize renewables, but to surcharge anything that burns oil.
----
That would raise the cost of electricity to the consumer...
Another error the PUC made was the refusal to allow for LNG (liquid natural gas)to be used here. It is vastly cheaper than oil/bunker fuel, burns amazingly clean and presents less of a hazard in the event of a spill than oil does. Their excuse was that they felt it would only be a transitional fuel until more renewables were available. Hello! LNG IS a renewable. The earth is making more of it every day. A new find was announced last week in West Texas that has enough natural gas to last the entire US 20+ years, all by itself.
Do you have any idea about how that gas is produced? Oh that's right, who cares, it's not in your backyard...
