platts megawatt daily

18
www.platts.com [ELECTRIC POWER ] Wednesday, August 19, 2015 MEGAWATT DAILY www.twitter.com/plattspower Inside this Issue Ga. regulators sign off on Vogtle expansion costs 12 Q2 N.Y. real-time prices fall 29% year on year 12 Indiana muni installing 120 MW of solar energy 13 Low and high average day-ahead LMP for Aug 19 ($/MWh) On-peak low On-peak high Off-peak low Off-peak high ISONE 40.52 42.04 24.67 25.20 NYISO 34.00 44.73 19.86 27.33 PJM 28.78 39.30 19.22 22.71 MISO 23.53 32.29 17.58 23.02 ERCOT 28.91 32.00 19.20 20.00 SPP 19.15 24.73 14.08 21.06 CAISO 36.07 37.45 28.31 29.26 Note: Lows and highs for each ISO are for various hubs and zones. A full listing of average LMPs are available for the hubs and zones inside this issue. Day-ahead bilateral indexes and spark spreads for Aug 19 Marginal Spark spreads Index heat rate @7k @8k @10k @12k @15k Southeast Southern, Into 30.75 11316 11.73 9.01 3.58 -1.86 -10.01 Florida 33.50 11279 12.71 9.74 3.80 -2.14 -11.05 Northwest Mid-C 40.00 16293 22.82 20.36 15.45 10.54 3.18 COB 43.72 16223 24.86 22.16 16.77 11.38 3.30 Southwest Palo Verde 35.98 13119 16.78 14.04 8.56 3.07 -5.16 Mead 39.25 13918 19.51 16.69 11.05 5.41 -3.05 Note: All indexes are on-peak. Spark spreads are reported in ($) and Marginal heat rates in (Btu/kWh). A full listing of bilateral indexes and marginal heat rates are inside this issue. Price trends at key trading points ($/MWh) Source: Platts 0 100 200 300 400 19-Aug 13-Aug 07-Aug 01-Aug 26-Jul 20-Jul SP15 ERCOT North Indiana Hub PJM West ISONE Hub The Electric Reliability Council of Texas has been underestimating demand growth, and Panda Power Funds is planning to build additional natural gas-fired capacity to help fill what Panda sees as an impending supply gap, an executive said Tuesday. “We have a contradictory view to ERCOT’s [Capacity, Demand and Reserves] numbers,” Michael Poray, Panda’s senior vice president of commercial operations and origination, said in an interview, referring to ERCOT’s expectation — expressed in its May CDR report—that the region’s reserve margin will remain comfortably high for the foreseeable future. Poray said Panda expects the ERCOT region to need more thermal generating capacity, and the developer now plans to add 450 to 500 MW of combined-cycle capacity next to Panda’s Panda plans for expected ERCOT supply gap (continued on page 14) A recent study indicates that in the short run, bulk energy storage could increase, rather than decrease, emissions from fossil-fueled electricity generation, but electricity market experts differ on the study’s implications. In a Scientific American blog published Monday, Robert Fares, a post-doctoral researcher at the University of Texas Energy institute, cited a study published in January in Environmental Science & Technology that said that in the short run, bulk energy storage would likely be charged by fossil-fueled electricity at times when they would otherwise be idle. In the Environmental Science & Technology article, Eric Hittinger of the Rochester Institute of Technology and Ines Azevedo of Carnegie Mellon University, said, “The results … show that the Bulk energy storage increases emissions: study (continued on page 15) Less than two weeks before the start of a crucial Ohio regulatory hearing that could chart the state’s energy future, a key report by the Ohio Public Utilities Commission staff is missing in action. In an unusual move, the staff missed an August 14 deadline to formally state its position on FirstEnergy’s proposed new electric security plan. The three-year plan includes the Akron-based company’s request for a controversial power purchase agreement covering more than 3,000 MW of generation, including two at-risk plants, the 2,233-MW Sammis baseload coal plant and 908- MW Davis-Besse nuclear plant, both in Ohio. Although the five-member commission does not always endorse a staff recommendation, it typically gives it considerable weight. PUC staff misses deadline in FirstEnergy case (continued on page 16) REGULATION GENERATION STORAGE

Upload: energy-institute

Post on 12-Feb-2016

25 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Robert Fares EI

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

www.platts.com

[ELECTRIC POWER ]

Wednesday, August 19, 2015

MEGAWATT DAILYwww.twitter.com/plattspower

Inside this Issue�� Ga. regulators sign off on Vogtle expansion costs 12�� Q2 N.Y. real-time prices fall 29% year on year 12�� Indiana muni installing 120 MW of solar energy 13

Low and high average day-ahead LMP for Aug 19 ($/MWh) On-peak low On-peak high Off-peak low Off-peak high

ISONE 40.52 42.04 24.67 25.20NYISO 34.00 44.73 19.86 27.33PJM 28.78 39.30 19.22 22.71MISO 23.53 32.29 17.58 23.02ERCOT 28.91 32.00 19.20 20.00SPP 19.15 24.73 14.08 21.06CAISO 36.07 37.45 28.31 29.26

Note: Lows and highs for each ISO are for various hubs and zones. A full listing of average LMPs are available for the hubs and zones inside this issue.

Day-ahead bilateral indexes and spark spreads for Aug 19 Marginal Spark spreads Index heat rate @7k @8k @10k @12k @15k

SoutheastSouthern, Into 30.75 11316 11.73 9.01 3.58 -1.86 -10.01Florida 33.50 11279 12.71 9.74 3.80 -2.14 -11.05

NorthwestMid-C 40.00 16293 22.82 20.36 15.45 10.54 3.18COB 43.72 16223 24.86 22.16 16.77 11.38 3.30

SouthwestPalo Verde 35.98 13119 16.78 14.04 8.56 3.07 -5.16Mead 39.25 13918 19.51 16.69 11.05 5.41 -3.05

Note: All indexes are on-peak. Spark spreads are reported in ($) and Marginal heat rates in (Btu/kWh). A full listing of bilateral indexes and marginal heat rates are inside this issue.

Price trends at key trading points ($/MWh)

Source: Platts

0

100

200

300

400

19-Aug13-Aug07-Aug01-Aug26-Jul20-Jul

SP15ERCOT NorthIndiana HubPJM WestISONE Hub

The Electric Reliability Council of Texas has been underestimating demand growth, and Panda Power

Funds is planning to build additional natural gas-fired capacity to help fill what Panda sees as an impending supply gap, an executive said Tuesday.

“We have a contradictory view to ERCOT’s [Capacity, Demand and Reserves] numbers,” Michael Poray, Panda’s senior vice president of commercial operations and origination, said in an interview, referring to ERCOT’s expectation — expressed in its May CDR report—that the region’s reserve margin will remain comfortably high for the foreseeable future.

Poray said Panda expects the ERCOT region to need more thermal generating capacity, and the developer now plans to add 450 to 500 MW of combined-cycle capacity next to Panda’s

Panda plans for expected ERCOT supply gap

(continued on page 14)

A recent study indicates that in the short run, bulk energy storage could increase, rather than decrease,

emissions from fossil-fueled electricity generation, but electricity market experts differ on the study’s implications.

In a Scientific American blog published Monday, Robert Fares, a post-doctoral researcher at the University of Texas Energy institute, cited a study published in January in Environmental Science & Technology that said that in the short run, bulk energy storage would likely be charged by fossil-fueled electricity at times when they would otherwise be idle.

In the Environmental Science & Technology article, Eric Hittinger of the Rochester Institute of Technology and Ines Azevedo of Carnegie Mellon University, said, “The results … show that the

Bulk energy storage increases emissions: study

(continued on page 15)

Less than two weeks before the start of a crucial Ohio regulatory hearing that could chart the state’s

energy future, a key report by the Ohio Public Utilities Commission staff is missing in action.

In an unusual move, the staff missed an August 14 deadline to formally state its position on FirstEnergy’s proposed new electric security plan. The three-year plan includes the Akron-based company’s request for a controversial power purchase agreement covering more than 3,000 MW of generation, including two at-risk plants, the 2,233-MW Sammis baseload coal plant and 908-MW Davis-Besse nuclear plant, both in Ohio.

Although the five-member commission does not always endorse a staff recommendation, it typically gives it considerable weight.

PUC staff misses deadline in FirstEnergy case

(continued on page 16)

REGULATION

GENERATION

STORAGE

Page 2: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

2 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

Northeast load and generation mix forecast (GWh) Actual % Chg Forecast 17-Aug %Chg Year-ago 18-Aug 19-Aug 20-Aug 21-Aug 22-Aug

ISONE

Load 471 16 0 447 437 409 394 364GenerationCoal 31 52 20 26 25 22 19 19Gas 221 8 8 222 203 183 174 177Nuclear 98 0 -8 98 98 98 98 98

NYISO

Load 503 -3 1 506 538 529 504 463GenerationCoal 13 16 -22 13 14 13 12 11Gas 268 21 25 260 245 222 205 200Nuclear 135 0 5 135 135 135 135 135

Source: Bentek

Northeast spot natural gas prices ($/MMBtu)

Source: Platts

1

2

3

4

5

6

18-Aug10-Aug31-Jul23-Jul15-Jul07-Jul

Iroquois zone 2 Transco zone 6 N.Y. Algonquin city-gates

ISONE & NYISO nuclear generation outages (GW)

Source: NRC

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

18-Aug3-Aug19-Jul4-Jul19-Jun4-Jun20-May

2015 2014 2013

NORThEAST MARkETS

Mass hub drops to low $40s/MWhWeaker demand projections and lower spot natural gas

pressured Northeast dailies Tuesday.Mass Hub on-peak prices for Wednesday delivery plummeted

$11.75 to about $40.25/MWh on the IntercontinentalExchange. Off-peak lost $4.25 to around $23.50/MWh.

Algonquin Gas Transmission city-gates spot gas sank 63.1 cents to $2.584/MMBtu.

The ISO New England predicted peakload to drop from 24,500 MW Tuesday to 23,000 MW Wednesday and 22,200 MW Thursday.

Temperature highs in Boston were forecast over 5 degrees above average Wednesday in the mid-80s.

Day-ahead on-peak locational marginal prices across New York state mostly dropped under pressure from bearish spot gas and demand projections.

New York ISO Zone G Hudson Valley day-ahead on-peak LMPs shed $10 to around $39.50/MWh for Wednesday delivery. Zone J New York City day-ahead on-peak fell $10.75 to roughly $42.75/MWh. Zone A West day-ahead on-peak jumped $1 to about $44/MWh.

Transco Zone 6 New York spot natural gas fell 16.6 cents to $2.700/MMBtu.

The New York ISO predicted peakload near 29,500 MW Tuesday, 28,850 MW Wednesday and 27,675 MW Thursday.

Temperature highs in New York state were forecast around 5 to 10 degrees above normal Wednesday in the mid- to upper 80s.

Weakened NYMEX gas futures and regional gas basis weighed on Northeast power forwards Tuesday afternoon, which were flat to lower.

In New England, Mass Hub on-peak September slipped 25 cents to roughly $32.25/MWh on ICE around 2:30 pm EDT. Mass Hub on-peak September, however, was flat at about $40/MWh.

In New York, Zone G and Zone A September packages were absent from afternoon activity.

NYMEX September gas futures eased 2.4 cents to $2.704/MMBtu. Algonquin city-gate September gas basis dropped 8.8 cents to negative 79.3 cents/MMBtu, while Transco Zone 6 NY September gas basis lost 10.8 cents to negative 62.8 cents/MMBtu.

Page 3: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

3 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

ISONE day-ahead LMP for Aug 19 ($/MWh) Avg MarginalHub/Zone Average Cong Loss Change $/Mo heat rate

On-peak

Internal Hub 41.12 -0.05 -0.03 -10.81 33.77 15597Connecticut 41.34 -0.05 0.19 -10.84 34.12 14418NE Mass-Boston 41.22 -0.05 0.08 -11.00 33.79 15637SE Mass 40.91 -0.05 -0.24 -11.00 33.71 15518West-Central Mass 41.30 -0.05 0.15 -10.82 33.94 15664Rhode Island 40.52 -0.05 -0.63 -10.65 33.33 15367Maine 40.66 0.07 -0.60 -10.34 33.05 13317New Hampshire 42.04 0.45 0.40 -10.31 34.07 13769Vermont 41.73 -0.05 0.58 -10.78 33.65 13667

Off-Peak

Internal Hub 24.94 0.00 -0.04 -1.07 18.61 7979Connecticut 25.16 0.00 0.18 -0.97 18.82 7912NE Mass-Boston 24.88 0.00 -0.10 -1.11 18.54 7961SE Mass 24.71 0.00 -0.27 -1.17 18.48 7906West-Central Mass 25.10 0.00 0.12 -1.09 18.73 8031Rhode Island 24.67 0.00 -0.31 -1.15 18.50 7894Maine 25.00 0.00 0.03 -0.83 18.55 7940New Hampshire 25.15 0.00 0.17 -1.02 18.70 7985Vermont 25.20 0.00 0.22 -1.12 18.94 8002

NYISO day-ahead LMP for Aug 19 ($/MWh) Avg MarginalHub/Zone Average Cong Loss Change $/Mo heat rate

On-peak

Capital Zone 38.08 0.00 2.66 -5.59 31.98 15735Central Zone 36.66 -0.82 0.42 -3.03 30.85 20130Dunwoodie Zone 39.62 0.00 4.20 -11.37 34.49 13514Genesee Zone 34.02 0.76 -0.64 -3.74 29.21 18680Hudson Valley Zone 39.59 0.00 4.17 -10.04 34.19 13504Long Island Zone 44.73 -3.79 5.52 -15.99 44.21 15257Millwood Zone 39.67 0.00 4.25 -11.30 34.51 13531Mohawk Valley Zone 36.51 0.00 1.09 -4.20 30.93 17668N.Y.C. Zone 42.67 -2.79 4.46 -10.72 35.90 14553North Zone 34.00 0.00 -1.42 -3.26 28.14 11135West Zone 43.94 -9.71 -1.18 0.99 35.44 24127

Off-Peak

Capital Zone 22.14 0.00 1.45 -2.23 18.05 8747Central Zone 20.92 0.00 0.24 -2.12 17.07 10840Dunwoodie Zone 23.01 0.00 2.32 -2.28 18.86 7551Genesee Zone 20.62 0.00 -0.07 -2.13 16.77 10684Hudson Valley Zone 22.93 0.00 2.24 -2.29 18.77 7524Long Island Zone 27.33 -3.57 3.08 -1.32 21.60 8970Millwood Zone 22.98 0.00 2.30 -2.29 18.84 7542Mohawk Valley Zone 21.40 0.00 0.71 -2.09 17.38 9844N.Y.C. Zone 24.44 -1.23 2.52 -1.34 19.25 8022North Zone 19.86 0.00 -0.83 -1.80 16.29 6306West Zone 20.41 0.00 -0.28 -2.23 16.85 10576

Generation unit outage reportPlant/Operator Cap Fuel State Status Return Shut

Northeast

Bruce-4/Bruce Power 780 n Ont. MO Unk 08/11/15Lake Superior/Brookfield 120 g Ont. PMO Unk 11/04/14Pickering-1/OPG 500 n Ont. MO Unk 05/15/15Thunderbay-3/OPG 153 bio Ont. MO Unk 04/16/15Tunder Bay/Resolute 116 bio Ont. MO Unk 08/18/15

Northeast Platts M2MS Forward Curve, Aug 18 ($/MWh)Prompt month: Sep 15 On-peak Off-peak

Mass Hub 32.35 20.10N.Y. Zone G 34.65 19.65N.Y. Zone J 36.05 19.90N.Y. Zone A 37.00 17.75Ontario* 21.75 12.80

*Ontario prices are in Canadian dollars

N.Y. Zone G: Forward curve on-peak ($/MWh)

0

20

40

60

80

100

Cal-1

9

Cal-1

8

Cal-1

7

Cal-1

6

Q4-1

7

Jul/

Aug-17

Mar

/Apr

-17

Jan/

Feb-

17

Sep-

17

Jun-

17

May

-17

Q4-1

6

Jul/

Aug-16

Mar

/Apr

-16

Jan/

Feb-

16

Sep-

16

Jun-

16

May

-16

Q4-1

5

Nov-1

5

Oct-1

5

Sep-

15N.Y. Zone G: Marginal heat rate on-peak (Btu/kWh)

20000

22000

24000

26000

28000

30000

18-Aug10-Aug31-Jul23-Jul15-Jul

Month 1Month 2

Page 4: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

4 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

Southeast & Central day-ahead bilateral indexes for Aug 19 ($/MWh) Avg Marginal Index Change $/Mo heat rateSoutheast On-peak

VACAR 32.25 -1.75 33.29 11518Southern, Into 30.75 0.75 31.10 11316GTC, Into 32.75 0.25 32.90 8096Florida 33.50 0.00 33.63 11279TVA, Into 30.75 -0.50 31.87 11131

Southeast Off-Peak

VACAR 21.00 0.25 20.82 7500Southern, Into 21.00 0.25 21.07 7728GTC, Into 22.00 0.25 21.59 8096Florida 22.00 -0.50 22.62 7407TVA, Into 21.00 0.25 20.92 7602

Southeast load and generation mix forecast (GWh) Actual % Chg Forecast 17-Aug %Chg Year-ago 18-Aug 19-Aug 20-Aug 21-Aug 22-Aug

ERCOT

Load 1257 11 4 1239 1151 1089 1114 1116GenerationCoal 486 9 2 480 461 443 447 457Gas 518 1 13 536 485 437 465 503Nuclear 123 0 8 123 123 123 123 123

SPP

Load 784 5 0 779 690 660 703 728GenerationCoal 436 6 -7 433 414 403 411 420Gas 217 18 14 216 166 148 158 179Nuclear 61 4 -5 61 61 61 61 61

Source: Bentek

Southeast & Central spot natural gas prices ($/MMBtu)

Source: Platts

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

18-Aug10-Aug31-Jul23-Jul15-Jul07-Jul

Panhandle, Tx. Okla. Houston Ship Channel Henry Hub

ERCOT & SPP nuclear generation outages (GW)

Source: NRC

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

18-Aug3-Aug19-Jul4-Jul19-Jun4-Jun20-May

2015 2014 2013

SOUThEAST MARkETS

ERCOT dailies down on weaker gasElectric Reliability Council of Texas dailies were down Tuesday

with weaker spot gas prices as near terms also dropped.ERCOT North Hub day-ahead on-peak lost $2.50 to about $30/

MWh for Wednesday delivery on the IntercontinentalExchange. ERCOT North Hub balance-of-the-day on-peak packages traded between $29/MWh and $40/MWh on ICE Tuesday and averaged about $35/MWh, roughly $2.50 above where the daily package traded on Monday.

Near terms lost ground with balance-of-the-week on-peak down $3 to about $29.25/MWh. Next-week on-peak fell $8.25 to nearly $40/MWh.

Spot natural gas at Houston Ship Channel lost 2.1 cents to around $2.699/MMBtu on ICE.

System load in ERCOT was forecast to peak at 67,400 MW Tuesday, 62,125 MW Wednesday and 56,875 MW Thursday. The all-time peak demand record is 69,783 MW set August 10.

Wind generation was forecast to peak at 8,575 MW at 1 am CDT Wednesday.

The high temperature for Dallas was forecast at dropping to 85 for Wednesday, 12 degrees below normal, with the low at 79, 3 degrees above average. In Houston, the high temperature was expected at 95, normal, with the low at 79, 5 degrees above normal. For San Antonio, the high was projected to be 99, 2 degrees above normal. The August record high is 111 in Dallas, 110 in San Antonio and 106 in Houston.

As of 3 pm CDT Tuesday, real-time on-peak prices averaged $25.50/MWh, about $1 below the Monday average of $26.25/MWh for the same time frame.

In the Southeast, dailies were weaker Tuesday on falling spot gas prices as temperatures were forecast steady.

Into Southern day-ahead on-peak physical power lost 50 cents to around $29.50/MWh for Wednesday delivery on ICE. Off-peak added $1.25 to about $22/MWh. Balance-of-the week was around $29.25/MWh. Next-week on-peak was near $31/MWh. Into Georgia Transmission Corporation day-ahead on-peak dropped 50 cents to roughly $32/MWh.

Spot natural gas at Transco Zone-3 lost 6.4 cents to about $2.706/MMBtu on ICE.

The high temperature in Atlanta was forecast at 87 for Wednesday, 2 degrees below normal, with the low expected at 72, 1 degree above normal.

ERCOT forwards were flat to weaker Tuesday with NYMEX September gas futures falling 2.4 cents to about $2.704/MMBtu.

ERCOT North Hub September on-peak was steady at nearly $31.75/MWh on ICE around 2:30 pm EDT. ERCOT North Hub September heat rates decreased 85 Btu/kWh on the ICE. October on-peak fell 25 cents to almost $28.75/MWh.

Page 5: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

5 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

ERCOT average day-ahead LMP for Aug 19 ($/MWh) Avg MarginalHub/Zone Average Change $/Mo heat rate

On-peak

Bus Average 29.61 0.25 77.77 11111Hub Average 29.97 0.44 78.18 11246Houston Hub 31.42 1.34 79.60 11661North Hub 28.92 -0.08 76.95 10879South Hub 30.33 0.54 78.73 11427West Hub 29.19 -0.06 77.44 11001AEN Zone 29.79 -0.01 78.82 11226CPS Zone 30.73 0.75 78.78 11580LCRA Zone 29.97 0.25 78.46 11294Rayburn Zone 28.91 -0.12 77.38 10872Houston Zone 32.00 1.63 81.06 11877North Zone 29.01 -0.12 77.44 10910South Zone 31.67 1.23 80.19 11932West Zone 29.49 -1.02 79.85 11112

Off-Peak

Bus Average 19.36 0.99 18.96 7184Hub Average 19.44 1.06 18.98 7213Houston Hub 19.75 1.37 19.01 7275North Hub 19.20 0.84 18.94 7137South Hub 19.59 1.19 18.99 7311West Hub 19.23 0.86 18.96 7129AEN Zone 19.24 0.91 18.96 7134CPS Zone 20.00 1.52 19.05 7462LCRA Zone 19.32 0.97 18.96 7208Rayburn Zone 19.24 0.58 18.97 7151Houston Zone 19.75 1.36 19.02 7277North Zone 19.21 0.85 18.95 7140South Zone 19.84 1.37 19.05 7402West Zone 19.22 0.79 19.02 7128

MISO South average day-ahead LMP for Aug 19 ($/MWh) Avg MarginalHub/Zone Average Cong Loss Change $/Mo heat rate

On-peak

Arkansas Hub 27.63 1.78 -1.30 -6.73 33.32 10327Louisiana Hub 29.92 2.25 0.52 -2.51 37.59 11116Texas Hub 32.29 4.90 0.25 -2.50 40.41 11978

Off-Peak

Arkansas Hub 20.26 2.62 -0.53 -0.68 21.59 7475Louisiana Hub 21.53 2.95 0.41 -0.54 22.54 7892Texas Hub 23.02 4.08 0.77 -0.48 23.23 8481

SPP average day-ahead LMP for Aug 19 ($/MWh) Avg MarginalHub/Zone Average Cong Loss Change $/Mo heat rate

On-peak

SPP North Hub 19.15 -2.14 -1.81 -2.32 30.15 6960SPP South Hub 24.73 0.95 0.68 -3.65 32.41 9666

Off-Peak

SPP North Hub 14.08 -2.71 -1.65 -0.64 16.58 5043SPP South Hub 21.06 2.27 0.36 0.68 20.35 8057

Southeast near-term bilateral markets ($/MWh)Package Trade date Range

Southern, into

Bal-week 08/18 29.00-29.50Next-week 08/18 30.75-31.25Next-week 08/12 34.25-35.25GTC, intoBal-week 08/18 31.75-32.25

Generation unit outage reportPlant/Operator Cap Fuel State Status Return Shut

Southeast & Central

Big Brown/Luminant 575 c Texas MO Unk 04/13/15Bowen-2/Georgia Power 800 c Ga. PMO Unk 04/04/13Limestone-2/NRG 860 c Texas MO Unk 08/09/14Martin Lake-2/Luminant 750 c Texas MO Unk 02/01/15Martin Lake-3/Luminant 750 c Texas MO Unk 06/18/15Monticello-1/Luminant 565 c Texas MO Unk 06/18/15Monticello-2/Luminant 565 c Texas MO Unk 06/11/14

Southeast & Central Platts M2MS Forward Curve, Aug 18 ($/MWh)Prompt month: Sep 15 On-peak Off-peak

Southern Into 34.90 25.30Entergy Into 33.95 27.50ERCOT North 31.65 22.15ERCOT Houston 34.25 23.00ERCOT West 32.05 22.30ERCOT South 33.10 21.80

Entergy Into: Forward curve on-peak ($/MWh)

0

10

20

30

40

50

Cal-1

9

Cal-1

8

Cal-1

7

Cal-1

6

Q4-1

7

Jul/

Aug-17

Mar

/Apr

-17

Jan/

Feb-

17

Sep-

17

Jun-

17

May

-17

Q4-1

6

Jul/

Aug-16

Mar

/Apr

-16

Jan/

Feb-

16

Sep-

16

Jun-

16

May

-16

Q4-1

5

Nov-1

5

Oct-1

5

Sep-

15Entergy Into: Marginal heat rate on-peak (Btu/kWh)

10000

11000

12000

13000

14000

18-Aug10-Aug31-Jul23-Jul15-Jul

Month 1Month 2

Daily generation outage referencesMO unplanned maintenance outage RF refueling outagePMO planned maintenance outage Unk unknownOA offline/availableFuels: Nuclear=n; Coal=c; Natural gas=g; Hydro=h ; Wind=wSources: Generation owners, public information and other market sources.

Page 6: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

6 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

Western day-ahead bilateral indexes for Aug 19 ($/MWh) Avg Marginal Index Change $/Mo heat rateOn-peak

Mid-C 40.00 -8.40 33.51 16293John Day 41.00 -8.50 34.52 16701COB 43.72 -8.44 36.97 16223NOB 41.50 -10.25 36.39 16904Palo Verde 35.98 -3.18 37.13 13119Westwing 36.75 -4.25 38.17 13400Pinnacle Peak 39.25 -3.00 39.56 14312Mead 39.25 -4.25 39.72 13918Mona 43.00 -4.50 42.00 16797Four Corners 37.75 -4.25 39.03 14165

Off-Peak

Mid-C 22.06 -2.16 23.91 8986John Day 23.00 -2.25 24.91 9369COB 21.81 -4.59 24.75 8093NOB 23.75 -3.25 25.50 9674Palo Verde 23.50 -0.55 25.01 8569Westwing 23.00 -0.50 25.25 8387Pinnacle Peak 24.75 -1.00 25.93 9025Mead 25.50 -0.50 26.87 9043Mona 24.00 0.00 24.96 9375Four Corners 24.00 0.00 25.37 9006

Western load and generation mix forecast (GWh) Actual % Chg Forecast 17-Aug %Chg Year-ago 18-Aug 19-Aug 20-Aug 21-Aug 22-Aug

CAISO

Load 687 -10 -5 699 701 708 706 659GenerationGas 341 -2 -9 315 298 295 295 298Nuclear 56 0 13 56 56 56 56 56

Source: Bentek

Western spot natural gas prices ($/MMBtu)

Source: Platts

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

3.5

4.0

18-Aug10-Aug31-Jul23-Jul15-Jul07-Jul

NW, Can. Bdr. (Sumas) SoCal Gas city-gate PG&E city-gate

CAISO nuclear generation outages (GW)

Source: NRC

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

18-Aug3-Aug19-Jul4-Jul19-Jun4-Jun20-May

2015 2014 2013

WEST MARkETS

Mid-C drops to low $40s/MWhWest day-ahead on-peak power prices decreased Tuesday as

temperatures were expected to ease to more normal levels.Bentek Energy estimated average temperatures in the West to

be 2 degrees above normal on Wednesday, cooler than the recorded temperatures from August 15-17, when average temperatures rose as high as 6 degrees above the norm.

In California, SP15 day-ahead on-peak was down $3.75 to about $38.25/MWh on the IntercontinentalExchange for Wednesday delivery. Cal-ISO projected peak demand at about 41,975 MW for Tuesday and 39,975 MW for Wednesday.

High temperatures in Sacramento were forecast at 94 on Wednesday, 3 degrees above average. Lows were expected to reach 62, 3 degrees above average.

The spot natural gas price in California decreased with SoCal city-gate down 6 cents to about $3.021/MMBtu.

In the Southwest, Palo Verde day-ahead on-peak was down $3 to around $36/MWh. Off-peak fell 75 cents to around $23.25/MWh.

Phoenix high temperatures were expected at 107 on Wednesday, 2 degrees above the norm. Lows were forecast at 86, 3 degrees higher than the average.

In the Northwest, Mid-Columbia day-ahead on-peak fell $8.50 to around $40/MWh. Off-peak gave up $2.25 to about $22/MWh.

Portland’s high temperature was forecast at 91 on Wednesday, compared with the norm of 80. Low temperatures were expected to reach 64, 6 degrees above normal.

Western US forwards pressed lower Tuesday as NYMEX September gas futures dropped 2.4 cents to about $2.704/MMBtu, a two-week low for the prompt month.

“The natural gas market is extending its test of the downside as the temperature outlook continues to trend somewhat cooler, reducing air-conditioning loads and power sector demand for natural gas,” Citi energy futures specialist Tim Evans said in the mid-morning market report.

Mid-Columbia on-peak September fell $1.25 to about $33/MWh on ICE around 2:30 pm EDT. Off-peak was down 25 cents to about $25.50/MWh.

Mid-C on-peak October lost 50 cents to nearly $28.75/MWh. On-peak fourth quarter gave up 50 cents to about $31/MWh.

In California, SP15 on-peak September was down $1.25 to about $38.50/MWh. On-peak fourth quarter fell $1 to about $35.75/MWh. PG&E city-gate September gas basis was at about 43 cents on ICE, up less than 1 cent from Monday.

In the Southwest, Palo Verde on-peak September was down 50 cents to about $30.50/MWh.

Page 7: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

7 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

CAISO average day-ahead LMP for Aug 19 ($/MWh) Avg MarginalHub/Zone Average Cong Loss Change $/Mo heat rate

On-peak

NP15 Gen Hub 37.11 -1.01 -0.98 -3.83 37.46 11819SP15 Gen Hub 37.45 -0.05 -1.61 -2.91 39.24 13279ZP26 Gen Hub 36.07 -0.64 -2.40 -3.77 37.92 12790

Off-Peak

NP15 Gen Hub 28.31 -1.41 -0.56 -0.57 29.11 8893SP15 Gen Hub 29.26 -0.04 -0.98 -0.21 30.42 10146ZP26 Gen Hub 28.89 0.00 -1.39 -0.33 30.06 10017

Western near-term bilateral markets ($/MWh)Package Trade date Range

Mid-C

Bal-week 08/18 27.00-27.50Bal-week 08/17 32.75-33.25Bal-week 08/14 32.50-33.00Bal-week 08/12 26.75-27.25Bal-month 08/18 29.50-30.00Bal-month 08/17 32.25-32.75Bal-month 08/14 32.00-32.50Bal-month 08/13 30.75-31.25Bal-month 08/12 32.75-33.25Bal-month (off-peak) 08/18 21.75-22.25Bal-month (off-peak) 08/17 23.00-23.50Bal-month (off-peak) 08/14 23.00-23.50Bal-month (off-peak) 08/13 23.25-23.75Bal-month (off-peak) 08/12 23.75-24.25Next-week 08/18 29.75-30.25Next-week 08/17 32.25-32.75Next-week 08/14 31.25-31.75Next-week 08/13 31.75-32.25Next-week 08/12 34.50-35.00Next-week (off-peak) 08/17 23.25-23.75

Palo Verde

Bal-month 08/18 32.75-33.25Bal-month 08/17 35.25-35.75Bal-month 08/13 35.25-35.75Bal-month 08/12 36.00-36.50

Generation unit outage reportPlant/Operator Cap Fuel State Status Return Shut

West

Alamitos-4/AES 335 g Calif. MO Unk 07/29/15Etiwanda-4/RRI 320 g Calif. MO Unk 08/16/15Gilroy Cogen/Calpine 120 g Calif. MO Unk 08/16/15La Rosita/Intergen 180 g Mex. PMO Unk 08/05/15Martinez/FWC 115 g Calif. PMO Unk 08/09/15Shiloh Wind Project/Iber 150 w Calif. PMO Unk 08/17/15

Western Platts M2MS Forward Curve, Aug 18 ($/MWh)Prompt month: Sep 15 On-peak Off-peak

Mid-C 33.10 25.50Palo Verde 30.65 23.35Mead 32.20 24.55NP15 38.05 30.65SP15 38.40 31.10

BPA & CAISO hydro and wind generation (GWh)

Source: BPA and CAISO

0

50

100

150

200

17-Aug12-Aug7-Aug2-Aug28-Jul23-Jul18-Jul

CAISO WindBPA WindCAISO HydroBPA Hydro

NP15: Forward curve on-peak ($/MWh)

0

10

20

30

40

50

Cal-1

9

Cal-1

8

Cal-1

7

Cal-1

6

Q4-1

7

Q3-1

7

Q2-1

7

Q1-1

7

Q4-1

6

Q3-1

6

Q2-1

6

Q1-1

6

Q4-1

5

Nov-1

5

Oct-1

5

Sep-

15

NP15: Marginal heat rate on-peak (Btu/kWh)

11000

12000

13000

14000

15000

18-Aug10-Aug31-Jul23-Jul15-Jul

Month 1Month 2

Market coveragePlatts provides a detailed methodology related to its coverage of North American electricity markets at: http://platts.com/MethodologyAndSpecifications/ElectricPower. Questions can be directed to Eric Wieser at (202) 383-2092 or [email protected].

Page 8: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

8 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

PJM & MISO load and generation mix forecast (GWh) Actual % Chg Forecast 17-Aug %Chg Year-ago 18-Aug 19-Aug 20-Aug 21-Aug 22-Aug

PJM

Load 2345 -2 1 2350 2431 2404 2308 2151GenerationCoal 854 -5 -11 882 891 889 890 884Gas 625 8 35 568 555 538 524 525Nuclear 800 0 1 800 800 800 800 800

MISO

Load 2197 5 0 2183 2097 2023 2012 1935GenerationCoal 1215 10 -12 1211 1174 1125 1124 1144Gas 426 5 50 428 388 354 373 398Nuclear 309 1 38 183 188 207 241 274

Source: Bentek

PJM & MISO spot natural gas prices ($/MMBtu)

Source: Platts

1

2

3

4

18-Aug10-Aug31-Jul23-Jul15-Jul07-Jul

Chicago city-gates Columbia Gas App Tx.Eastern, M-3

PJM & MISO nuclear generation outages (GW)

Source: NRC

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

18-Aug3-Aug19-Jul4-Jul19-Jun4-Jun20-May

2015 2014 2013

PJM & MISO MARkETS

PJM West falls to mid-$30s/MWh on gas, demandMid-Atlantic dailies fell Tuesday as both spot natural gas and

demand projections dropped.PJM West Hub on-peak sank $10 to about $36.25/MWh for

Wednesday delivery on the IntercontinentalExchange. PJM West Hub day-ahead off-peak shed 50 cents to around $22.50/MWh.

The PJM Interconnection forecast demand to fall from near 134,975 MW Tuesday to about 128,250 MW Wednesday and 121,400 MW Thursday.

Texas Eastern M-3 day-ahead natural gas lost 24.3 cents to $1.427/MMBtu, weighing on prices.

Temperatures in the PJM Interconnection eastern region were forecast a few degrees from the norm in either direction Wednesday, with highs ranging in the upper 70s to lower 90s.

Lower demand projections pressured Midcontinent dailies.Indiana Hub day-ahead on-peak scaled back $4.25 to about

$30.75/MWh for Wednesday delivery. Off peak slipped $1 to around $21/MWh.

The Midcontinent ISO forecast peakload near 104,800 MW Tuesday, 96,375 MW Wednesday and 93,550 MW Thursday.

Indianapolis temperature highs were forecast a few degrees below average in the lower 80s Wednesday and Thursday.

Dailies in the Midwestern portion of PJM were lower amid weakness in nearby markets.

AD Hub day-ahead on-peak for Wednesday delivery lost nearly $6.50 to roughly $33.75/MWh, while off-peak eased 75 cents to about $22/MWh. NI Hub day-ahead on-peak fell $6.25 to around $30.25/MWh.

Mid-Atlantic forwards were unchanged Tuesday afternoon despite both weaker regional gas basis and lower NYMEX gas futures.

PJM West Hub on-peak September financial futures were stable at roughly $40/MWh on ICE around 2:30 pm EDT. PJM West Hub on-peak October financial futures were flat at about $39.25/MWh.

NYMEX September gas futures eased 2.4 cents to $2.704/MMBtu, while Texas Eastern M-3 September gas basis dropped 6 cents to negative $1.265/MMBtu.

Midwest forwards rose, ignoring weakness in the NYMEX front-month gas contract.

AD Hub on-peak September gained 25 cents to about $37.25/MWh, while NI Hub on-peak September added nearly 50 cents to over $33.75/MWh.

Additional information on data and analysisFor more information on data and analysis from Bentek Analytics, including five-day load and generation mix forecasts and relative load normalized by temperature, email [email protected], or call 303-988-1320. Average on-peak and off-peak LMP and marginal heat-rate data is available via Platts Market Data. More detailed, hourly LMP and marginal heat-rate data is available from Bentek Analytics.

Page 9: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

9 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

MISO average day-ahead LMP for Aug 19 ($/MWh) Avg MarginalHub/Zone Average Cong Loss Change $/Mo heat rate

On-peak

Indiana Hub 29.98 2.13 0.70 -6.99 33.11 14626Michigan Hub 30.16 2.05 0.96 -8.02 33.64 10078Minnesota Hub 23.53 -1.39 -2.23 -4.01 32.55 8355Illinois Hub 27.52 0.61 -0.25 -11.43 33.09 9526

Off-Peak

Indiana Hub 19.45 0.71 0.57 -3.02 20.91 9217Michigan Hub 21.05 2.23 0.65 -2.09 21.22 6976Minnesota Hub 17.58 1.28 -1.88 -2.13 19.08 6189Illinois Hub 20.19 2.14 -0.13 -2.13 20.64 6947

PJM average day-ahead LMP for Aug 19 ($/MWh) Avg MarginalHub/Zone Average Cong Loss Change $/Mo heat rate

On-peak

AEP Gen Hub 32.18 -0.05 -2.25 -0.74 34.82 13672AEP-Dayton Hub 32.34 -0.94 -1.20 -1.48 35.37 13743ATSI Gen Hub 33.33 -0.82 -0.33 -1.38 35.53 14273Chicago Gen Hub 28.78 -3.52 -2.17 -3.40 33.33 10057Chicago Hub 30.34 -2.55 -1.59 -3.17 34.31 10602Dominion Hub 35.22 1.52 -0.77 -2.16 37.83 12841Eastern Hub 37.97 1.34 2.15 -6.64 35.09 18151New Jersey Hub 36.46 0.23 1.76 -3.38 33.51 17430Northern Illinois Hub 29.90 -2.74 -1.84 -3.68 33.97 10446Ohio Hub 32.07 -1.35 -1.06 -1.72 35.22 11427West Internal Hub 32.87 -0.68 -0.92 -2.01 35.72 18439Western Hub 35.46 0.58 0.40 -3.32 37.41 19888AEP Zone 33.09 -0.29 -1.10 -1.22 35.73 14059Allegheny Power Zone 34.90 0.75 -0.33 -1.74 36.73 15480Atlantic Elec Zone 36.82 0.80 1.55 -2.39 33.80 17602ATSI Zone 33.87 -0.82 0.22 -1.65 36.05 14505BG&E Zone 39.30 3.37 1.45 -1.17 44.02 17449ComEd Zone 30.26 -2.56 -1.66 -3.28 34.18 10573Dayton P&L Zone 33.22 -1.16 -0.09 -1.93 36.46 12200Delmarva P&L Zone 37.41 1.08 1.85 -6.44 35.04 17884Dominion Zone 36.24 1.96 -0.19 -2.27 38.58 13212Duke Zone 32.48 -0.27 -1.73 -1.16 35.70 11927Duquesne Light Zone 32.50 -0.97 -1.00 -1.70 35.25 16123EKPC Zone 30.92 -1.50 -2.06 -1.87 34.64 15130JCPL Zone 36.22 0.01 1.73 -3.33 33.22 17313MetEd Zone 38.79 3.43 0.88 -1.59 32.99 16963PECO Zone 36.11 0.47 1.17 -2.80 32.28 15793Pennsylvania Elec Zone 35.22 -0.38 1.13 -4.76 35.56 18757PEPCO Zone 38.29 2.98 0.83 -1.53 41.32 17000PPL Zone 35.29 0.04 0.77 -2.78 32.15 15434PSEG Zone 36.58 0.21 1.90 -3.62 33.68 17489Rockland Elec Zone 36.32 -0.09 1.94 -3.79 33.87 17362

Off-Peak

AEP Gen Hub 20.87 -0.05 -0.73 -0.96 20.10 8645AEP-Dayton Hub 21.31 -0.06 -0.28 -1.05 20.51 8828ATSI Gen Hub 21.59 -0.03 -0.03 -0.96 20.29 8936Chicago Gen Hub 19.22 -1.34 -1.09 -2.18 18.83 6684Chicago Hub 20.29 -0.54 -0.82 -1.63 19.34 7056Dominion Hub 22.31 0.53 0.13 -0.45 21.68 8016Eastern Hub 21.98 -0.09 0.43 -0.56 18.43 9789New Jersey Hub 22.00 -0.07 0.43 -0.63 18.14 9796Northern Illinois Hub 19.95 -0.75 -0.95 -1.81 19.18 6938Ohio Hub 21.33 -0.06 -0.25 -1.07 20.53 7534West Internal Hub 21.67 0.20 -0.18 -0.76 20.68 11378Western Hub 21.95 0.19 0.11 -0.70 20.76 11522AEP Zone 21.50 0.04 -0.19 -0.95 20.58 8906Allegheny Power Zone 21.83 0.13 0.05 -0.76 20.70 9408Atlantic Elec Zone 21.77 -0.07 0.19 -0.64 17.85 9694ATSI Zone 21.85 -0.02 0.23 -0.95 20.48 9046BG&E Zone 22.71 0.54 0.53 -0.74 24.37 9593ComEd Zone 20.14 -0.65 -0.86 -1.69 19.24 7004Dayton P&L Zone 21.84 -0.04 0.23 -1.11 21.11 7947Delmarva P&L Zone 21.91 -0.09 0.35 -0.55 18.61 9755Dominion Zone 22.35 0.46 0.24 -0.54 21.91 8029Duke Zone 21.12 -0.02 -0.50 -1.05 20.79 7685Duquesne Light Zone 21.37 0.00 -0.28 -0.85 20.07 10054EKPC Zone 20.86 -0.10 -0.69 -1.09 20.18 9824JCPL Zone 21.96 -0.08 0.40 -0.55 18.01 9780MetEd Zone 21.57 -0.09 0.01 -0.53 17.49 8981PECO Zone 21.67 -0.09 0.12 -0.58 17.64 9024Pennsylvania Elec Zone 22.23 -0.02 0.60 -0.81 19.62 11365PEPCO Zone 22.43 0.41 0.37 -0.70 22.82 9475PPL Zone 21.54 -0.09 -0.02 -0.56 17.60 8968PSEG Zone 22.12 -0.07 0.54 -0.71 18.33 9849Rockland Elec Zone 22.15 -0.07 0.57 -0.76 18.49 9864

PJM & MISO Platts M2MS Forward Curve, Aug 18 ($/MWh)Prompt month: Sep 15 On-peak Off-peak

PJM West 39.95 25.85AD Hub 37.20 24.85NI Hub 33.50 21.00Indiana Hub 34.25 22.95

Ad Hub: Forward curve on-peak ($/MWh)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Cal-1

9

Cal-1

8

Cal-1

7

Cal-1

6

Q4-1

7

Jul/

Aug-17

Mar

/Apr

-17

Jan/

Feb-

17

Sep-

17

Jun-

17

May

-17

Q4-1

6

Jul/

Aug-16

Mar

/Apr

-16

Jan/

Feb-

16

Sep-

16

Jun-

16

May

-16

Q4-1

5

Nov-1

5

Oct-1

5

Sep-

15

AD Hub: Marginal heat rate on-peak (Btu/kWh)

12000

13000

14000

15000

16000

18-Aug10-Aug31-Jul23-Jul15-Jul

Month 1Month 2

Page 10: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

10 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

ISONE average real-time LMP for Aug 17 ($/MWh) Avg Marginal DA/RT Avg MoHub/Zone Average Change $/Mo heat rate spread DA/RT

On-peak

Internal Hub 54.56 12.55 35.04 17953 10.43 -2.77Connecticut 54.84 12.40 35.48 17741 10.25 -2.84NE Mass-Boston 55.00 12.67 35.21 18100 10.00 -2.94SE Mass 54.88 12.63 35.11 18061 10.89 -2.89West-Central Mass 54.62 12.55 35.14 17974 10.56 -2.70Rhode Island 54.17 12.38 34.79 17825 9.93 -2.93Maine 52.86 11.83 34.12 17023 9.80 -2.57New Hampshire 54.51 12.42 34.81 17554 10.34 -2.29Vermont 54.60 12.56 34.68 17585 10.45 -2.62

Off-Peak

Internal Hub 22.09 2.69 17.56 7269 4.81 0.25Connecticut 22.18 2.65 17.81 7174 4.80 0.21NE Mass-Boston 22.16 2.75 17.51 7291 4.71 0.22SE Mass 22.04 2.69 17.46 7254 4.68 0.23West-Central Mass 22.20 2.71 17.65 7304 4.86 0.26Rhode Island 21.94 2.53 17.45 7221 4.66 0.26Maine 21.96 2.82 17.72 7071 4.79 0.02New Hampshire 22.14 2.79 17.88 7132 4.85 0.00Vermont 22.16 2.74 18.05 7136 4.85 0.09

NYISO average real-time LMP for Aug 17 ($/MWh) Avg Marginal DA/RT Avg MoHub/Zone Average Change $/Mo heat rate spread DA/RT

On-peak

Capital Zone 47.25 11.47 32.39 18794 4.09 -1.45Central Zone 50.35 16.17 31.95 26259 -1.10 -1.96Dunwoodie Zone 48.10 11.61 34.18 15778 7.25 -0.95Genesee Zone 42.27 8.60 29.63 22043 3.55 -1.20Hudson Valley Zone 48.51 11.55 34.11 15910 6.37 -1.14Long Island Zone 50.30 10.88 38.56 16500 14.25 4.65Millwood Zone 48.68 11.82 34.34 15968 6.76 -1.10Mohawk Valley Zone 46.98 12.24 31.63 21441 2.39 -1.61N.Y.C. Zone 56.93 18.88 36.82 18673 0.61 -2.34North Zone 41.51 9.14 28.98 13368 3.04 -1.73West Zone 78.16 45.56 40.51 40759 -18.81 -6.01

Off-Peak

Capital Zone 24.30 0.81 18.62 9664 1.10 -1.18Central Zone 23.02 0.74 17.82 12005 1.11 -1.33Dunwoodie Zone 24.90 0.56 19.15 8167 1.68 -0.91Genesee Zone 22.45 0.31 17.42 11709 1.38 -1.23Hudson Valley Zone 24.79 0.63 19.07 8130 1.66 -0.93Long Island Zone 29.50 0.99 22.89 9677 0.08 -2.03Millwood Zone 24.89 0.62 19.16 8163 1.65 -0.94Mohawk Valley Zone 23.51 0.71 18.09 10727 1.00 -1.30N.Y.C. Zone 26.53 1.10 20.76 8703 1.01 -2.20North Zone 21.54 0.07 17.72 6938 1.02 -1.96West Zone 22.46 0.41 18.25 11714 1.42 -1.94

Ontario average hourly prices for Aug 17 ($/MWh) Avg MarginalHub/Zone Average Change $/Mo heat rate

On-peak

IESO 40.51 5.33 29.54 13458

Off-Peak

IESO 17.14 0.30 10.44 5693

PJM average real-time LMP for Aug 17 ($/MWh) Avg Marginal DA/RT Avg MoHub/Zone Average Change $/Mo heat rate spread DA/RT

On-peak

AEP Gen Hub 29.94 0.98 32.54 12339 20.28 2.56AEP-Dayton Hub 30.86 0.77 33.65 12716 19.02 1.98ATSI Gen Hub 32.06 1.46 33.46 13354 18.49 2.25Chicago Gen Hub 29.49 0.34 33.00 10142 16.94 0.66Chicago Hub 30.44 0.59 33.61 10470 18.71 0.99Dominion Hub 32.03 1.62 35.67 11339 20.18 2.34Eastern Hub 37.92 -18.79 34.26 16893 19.45 0.10New Jersy Hub 36.42 4.12 30.92 16221 18.08 2.04Northern Illinois Hub 30.01 0.37 33.37 10321 18.33 0.85Ohio Hub 30.94 0.68 33.78 10815 18.19 1.71West Internal Hub 32.38 2.27 33.94 17179 17.01 2.00Western Hub 36.55 5.52 34.72 19390 18.02 2.72AEP Zone 31.27 1.23 33.72 12885 19.61 2.25Allegheny Power Zone 33.83 3.21 34.54 14426 20.52 2.31Atlantic Elec Zone 36.57 5.14 31.47 16289 17.30 1.83ATSI Zone 34.25 3.22 33.99 14266 17.16 2.22BG&E Zone 36.63 4.27 40.93 15475 18.63 3.57ComEd Zone 30.58 0.82 33.55 10518 18.07 0.90Dayton P&L Zone 32.50 1.35 34.84 11639 18.24 1.88Delmarva P&L Zone 36.54 -15.42 34.01 16276 20.13 0.38Dominion Zone 32.70 1.91 36.31 11574 20.40 2.41Duke Zone 31.61 2.10 33.39 11321 18.24 2.62Duquesne Light Zone 32.14 2.29 32.82 15289 19.06 2.65EKPC Zone 28.50 -0.76 33.08 13307 19.61 1.89JCPL Zone 36.59 4.11 30.83 16296 17.71 1.85MetEd Zone 35.88 4.38 30.94 14862 18.89 1.27PECO Zone 37.39 5.39 30.20 15488 14.96 1.46Pennsylvania Elec Zone 39.35 7.70 33.40 19530 16.30 1.92PEPCO Zone 35.50 3.92 38.29 15001 19.16 3.30PPL Zone 35.68 4.23 29.94 14781 16.65 1.67PSEG Zone 36.33 4.00 30.88 16181 18.51 2.25Rockland Elec Zone 36.51 3.98 31.36 16263 18.23 1.99

Off-Peak

AEP Gen Hub 21.00 19.77 17.14 8654 0.33 2.82AEP-Dayton Hub 21.55 20.23 17.55 8882 0.26 2.81ATSI Gen Hub 21.80 20.39 17.23 9079 -0.08 2.85Chicago Gen Hub 20.93 19.72 17.01 7198 0.09 1.65Chicago Hub 21.27 19.95 17.25 7315 0.24 1.88Dominion Hub 21.74 20.33 18.57 7696 0.23 3.01Eastern Hub 22.38 19.22 14.67 9971 -0.62 3.31New Jersy Hub 22.31 20.60 14.65 9937 -0.59 2.99Northern Illinois Hub 21.15 19.83 17.17 7273 0.19 1.82Ohio Hub 21.63 20.29 17.59 7562 0.24 2.78West Internal Hub 21.57 20.19 17.62 11442 0.03 2.90Western Hub 21.97 20.47 17.70 11653 -0.34 2.88AEP Zone 21.58 20.26 17.59 8891 0.25 2.83Allegheny Power Zone 21.82 20.40 17.56 9304 -0.09 2.97Atlantic Elec Zone 22.28 20.53 14.57 9923 -0.76 2.78ATSI Zone 22.00 20.56 17.37 9163 -0.09 2.89BG&E Zone 22.58 20.89 21.48 9541 -0.21 3.04ComEd Zone 21.23 19.93 17.22 7300 0.18 1.82Dayton P&L Zone 22.08 20.72 17.96 7905 0.25 2.99Delmarva P&L Zone 22.27 19.44 14.58 9920 -0.55 3.61Dominion Zone 21.90 20.44 18.78 7752 0.15 3.04Duke Zone 21.20 19.98 17.44 7590 0.51 3.24Duquesne Light Zone 21.38 20.06 16.95 10171 -0.02 2.91EKPC Zone 21.06 19.83 17.40 9834 0.46 2.63JCPL Zone 22.30 20.56 14.56 9934 -0.73 2.96MetEd Zone 21.97 20.38 14.17 9098 -0.73 2.81PECO Zone 22.10 20.44 14.27 9156 -0.70 2.86Pennsylvania Elec Zone 22.48 20.96 16.35 11155 -0.55 2.91PEPCO Zone 22.24 20.65 19.80 9396 -0.07 3.03PPL Zone 21.93 20.33 14.31 9083 -0.72 2.79PSEG Zone 22.35 20.66 14.78 9956 -0.44 3.07Rockland Elec Zone 22.40 20.72 15.16 9977 -0.53 2.86

Page 11: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

11 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

Alberta average hourly prices for Aug 17 ($/MWh) Avg MarginalHub/Zone Average Change $/Mo heat rate

On-peak

AESO 39.06 16.87 55.12 13646

Off-Peak

AESO 17.37 -2.18 19.80 6068

CAISO average real-time LMP for Aug 17 ($/MWh) Avg Marginal DA/RT Avg MoHub/Zone Average Change $/Mo heat rate spread DA/RT

On-peak

NP15 Gen Hub 95.00 62.61 37.54 29229 -51.12 -0.27SP15 Gen Hub 35.95 -38.44 37.95 12270 8.07 1.33ZP26 Gen Hub 44.30 17.84 33.37 15119 -1.07 4.55

Off-Peak

NP15 Gen Hub 27.29 0.83 27.29 8398 2.08 1.88SP15 Gen Hub 25.84 -0.62 26.91 8819 3.93 3.64ZP26 Gen Hub 25.92 -0.53 26.79 8846 3.52 3.38

ERCOT average real-time LMP for Aug 17 ($/MWh) Avg Marginal DA/RT Avg MoHub/Zone Average Change $/Mo heat rate spread DA/RT

On-peak

Bus Average 30.34 1.72 53.34 10993 2.19 30.11Hub Average 30.33 1.64 53.44 10991 2.30 30.44Houston Hub 30.32 1.31 53.51 10794 2.44 31.84North Hub 30.37 1.89 53.23 11062 1.93 29.37South Hub 30.27 1.52 53.31 11041 2.64 31.15West Hub 30.38 1.86 53.74 11069 2.17 29.37AEN Zone 30.37 1.71 53.30 11063 3.49 31.29CPS Zone 30.42 1.70 53.32 11098 2.52 31.16LCRA Zone 30.38 1.70 53.36 11081 2.69 30.81Rayburn Zone 30.37 1.89 55.09 11062 1.92 27.99Houston Zone 30.32 1.27 53.54 10794 2.69 33.39North Zone 30.37 1.89 54.70 11062 2.09 28.43South Zone 30.16 1.33 53.68 11004 3.48 32.29West Zone 30.40 1.87 55.78 11074 3.66 29.94

Off-Peak

Bus Average 18.12 -0.36 18.54 6564 0.64 0.44Hub Average 18.11 -0.38 18.54 6563 0.66 0.44Houston Hub 18.11 -0.38 18.54 6447 0.66 0.46North Hub 18.13 -0.34 18.54 6605 0.62 0.42South Hub 18.08 -0.44 18.54 6594 0.71 0.44West Hub 18.14 -0.33 18.54 6609 0.62 0.44AEN Zone 18.13 -0.30 18.54 6605 0.60 0.44CPS Zone 18.15 -0.47 18.56 6622 0.71 0.47LCRA Zone 18.13 -0.33 18.54 6614 0.61 0.44Rayburn Zone 18.13 -0.34 18.54 6605 0.68 0.43Houston Zone 18.11 -0.39 18.54 6447 0.66 0.47North Zone 18.13 -0.34 18.54 6605 0.62 0.43South Zone 18.01 -0.53 18.55 6570 0.81 0.49West Zone 18.15 -0.32 18.53 6612 0.65 0.52

MISO average real-time LMP for Aug 17 ($/MWh) Avg Marginal DA/RT Avg MoHub/Zone Average Change $/Mo heat rate spread DA/RT

On-peak

Indiana Hub 37.78 11.95 32.45 17646 3.52 0.61Michigan Hub 39.92 13.19 33.29 13290 3.17 0.29Minnesota Hub 27.78 3.22 32.78 9654 10.94 0.60Illinois Hub 37.99 11.21 32.94 12959 4.69 0.13

Off-Peak

Indiana Hub 22.25 5.47 20.14 10391 0.71 0.76Michigan Hub 22.78 5.56 20.36 7585 0.60 0.76Minnesota Hub 20.24 0.92 19.03 7033 1.03 0.10Illinois Hub 22.13 5.09 19.79 7548 -0.59 0.78

MISO South average real-time LMP for Aug 17 ($/MWh) Avg Marginal DA/RT Avg MoHub/Zone Average Change $/Mo heat rate spread DA/RT

On-peak

Arkansas Hub 25.22 1.08 32.05 9258 8.22 1.55Louisiana Hub 26.43 1.12 39.70 9624 5.74 -1.36Texas Hub 27.12 1.47 40.16 9656 5.55 1.05

Off-Peak

Arkansas Hub 20.64 1.41 20.96 7579 -0.14 0.75Louisiana Hub 21.66 1.55 21.91 7886 -0.06 0.71Texas Hub 22.23 1.75 24.98 7913 -0.20 -1.75

SPP average real-time LMP for Aug 17 ($/MWh) Avg Marginal DA/RT Avg MoHub/Zone Average Change $/Mo heat rate spread DA/RT

On-peak

SPP North Hub 23.42 -0.61 27.35 8244 9.50 3.96SPP South Hub 31.40 4.05 30.59 11636 3.50 2.51

Off-Peak

SPP North Hub 14.89 1.96 15.48 5239 1.16 1.36SPP South Hub 19.69 -0.93 18.99 7298 1.02 1.32

Page 12: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

12 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

NEWS

Ga. regulators sign off on Vogtle expansion costsThe Georgia Public Service Commission on Tuesday endorsed

Georgia Power’s spending on the 2,234-MW Vogtle nuclear plant expansion in the second half of 2014, rejecting pressure from project critics to reduce the utility’s allowable rate of return on equity.

In a unanimous vote, the PSC verified and approved the $169 million Georgia Power spent on building Vogtle-3 and -4 in the July-through-December period of 2014. Costs must be verified and approved before they can eventually be recovered in electricity rates.

The costs increased the utility’s cumulative spending on its 45.7% ownership interest in the two-unit expansion to $2.966 billion.

PSC Chairman Chuck Eaton said the commissioners “continue to support Plant Vogtle as a project that will provide clean, carbon-free energy for Georgia’s future.” The statement said the PSC also directs Georgia Power to “continue to provide delay scenarios of 24, 36, and 48 months beyond the current forecasted in-service dates as part of its future Vogtle Construction Monitoring filings,” also known as the VCM.

Georgia Power originally expected the two Westinghouse AP1000 units at Vogtle to begin commercial operation in April 2016 and April 2017, respectively; it now expects the units to come online in June 2019 and June 2020, utility spokesman John O’Brien said Tuesday.

The PSC also said Georgia Power must “provide for each delay scenario an estimate of total project cost and the full embedded cost revenue requirements associated with the total project cost result that the company expects customers have and will continue to incur both during construction and over the operating lives of the units,” the commission said.

Finally, the PSC said Georgia Power is required “to develop and implement a mechanism to track replacement fuel costs in all future reporting periods.”

Georgia Power said in a statement Monday that the company had completed the “placement of the CA01 module for Vogtle Unit 3 — the heaviest ‘lift’ of the project to date, at 2.28 million pounds.”

O’Brien, the utility spokesman, said Georgia Power is “pleased with the commission’s unanimous vote to approve costs submitted as part of the 12th VCM.”

Critics sought reduced ROEIn a statement, the anti-nuclear Southern Alliance for Clean

Energy said that it had asked the PSC to reduce the effect of the project on ratepayers “by reducing [Georgia Power’s] allowed return on equity from the current 10.95%,” but the PSC rejected that request.

SACE noted that the South Carolina Public Service Commission currently is reviewing a proposed settlement agreement under which South Carolina Electric & Gas, which is

also building two AP1000 reactors, agreed to reduce the ROE for its investment in the Summer plant expansion project to 10.5% from the current 11%.

SCE&G owns 55% of the project’s planned 2,234 MW, and is under contract to buy another 5% from Santee Cooper, the project’s co-owners.

SACE noted that while Georgia Power’s original estimate for the total cost of the Vogtle expansion was $14.1 billion, the expected 39-month delay in completing each of the units “and additional costs still being litigated” between the project’s co-owners and the CB&I/Westinghouse consortium building will likely push the project’s total cost to “over $18 billion.”

Another critic of the Vogtle expansion project, Nuclear Watch South, said in a statement Tuesday that it had proposed the new units “be cancelled or deferred until there is a market for the energy.” The group also said it “argued for studies comparing the project benefits of Vogtle to distributed solar and wind generation, an idea also put forth by consumer advocacy group Georgia Watch,” but that those suggestions were rejected by the PSC.

Glenn Carroll, Nuclear Watch South’s coordinator, said in the statement that the Vogtle expansion project “continues to fall behind a month for every month it has been under construction, even as solar and wind generation have become cheaper than nuclear. The commissioners went out of their way today to display their slavish devotion to nuclear power, refusing to even entertain the question of whether there is a better and cheaper way for Georgia citizens to light and air condition their homes.”

The project’s other co-owners are Oglethorpe Power, with a 30% stake; Municipal Electric Authority of Georgia, with 22.7%; and the municipal utility in Dalton, Georgia, with 1.6%.

The Georgia PSC’s review of Vogtle costs will continue. “We expect to file the next VCM in the coming weeks,” said O’Brien; that report will cover Georgia Power’s expenditures on the project during the first six months of 2015.

— Housley Carr

Q2 N.Y. real-time prices fall 29% year on yearReal-time locational marginal power prices averaged $29/MWh

in New York in the second quarter of 2015, down 29% year on year, Potomac Economics, the New York Independent System Operator’s market monitor, said in a report.

Lower natural gas prices were the primary driver for power prices in the most recent quarter, Potomac Economics said.

Natural gas prices fell by between 34% and 58% compared with the second quarter of 2014, which had an average of $4.68/MMBtu for Iroquois Zone 2 and an average of $3.47/MMBtu for

Load-Weighted Average Prices ($/MWh)

Quarter West Central Capital Hud VL NYC LI

2015 Q2 $30.27 $24.05 $25.48 $28.29 $29.77 $36.282015 Q1 $46.20 $48.91 $77.96 $71.42 $72.48 $86.632014 Q2 $37.24 $36.33 $37.41 $39.66 $40.47 $50.58

Source: Potomac Economics

Page 13: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

13 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

Dominion North, the highest and lowest prices for the quarter. Prices fell in Q2 to an average of $2.72/MMBtu for Iroquois Zone 2 and $1.45/MMBtu at Dominion North, the report said.

Frequent and acute intra-zonal real-time congestion pushed Q2 real-time power prices in the New York ISO’s West Zone 11% higher than day-ahead prices, the report said. “These intra-zonal constraints led to poor price convergence at node-level,” the report said.

Real-time load weighted average prices in the West Zone were $30.27/MWh in Q2, $24.05/MWh in the Central Zone, $25.48/MWh in the Capital Zone, $28.29/MWh in the Hudson Valley Zone, $29.77/MWh in the New York City Zone and $36.28/MWh in the Long Island Zone.

Fewer outages at nuclear plants increased the average nuclear generation by 405 MW in Q2, which helped lower the locational marginal price, the report added.

Nuclear generation increased to 5.08 GWh in Q2 from 4.67 GWh in Q2 2014 while generation from gas-fired power plants increased to 6.34 GWh in Q2 fom 6.06 GWh. Coal-fired generation dropped to 0.15 GWh in Q2 from 0.43 GWh in the year-ago period.

Total generation in the most recent quarter increased to 15.13 GWh from 14.98 GWh in Q2 2014.

Day-ahead market congestion revenue rose 44% to $73 million from $51 million a year ago, the report said. Large gas spreads between the East and West zones in the ISO footprint led to increased congestion on the Central-East interface and on transmission paths into southeast New York.

About 40% of the total congestion was caused by congestion on West Zone 230-kV transmission lines, the market monitor said. The increase was attributable in part to lower coal-fired production in the West Zone and decreased exports to the PJM Interconnection.

Real-time congestion in the West Zone was 60% higher than in the day-ahead market as a result of real-time Lake Erie loop flows and incomplete use of parallel 115-kV lines to unload 230-kV constraints, the report said.

“We estimate that optimizing the distribution of output among the units at the Niagara plant during periods of acute congestion to fully utilize the parallel 115-kV facilities would have reduced production costs by $2.1 million and allowed an additional 31 GWh of deliverable generation from Niagara,” the market monitor said.

Spot capacity prices in Q2 fell 18% in New York City to an average of $12.92/kW-month and fell 8% in the Lower Hudson Valley to an average of $8.10/kWh-month. Long Island spot capacity prices fell 8% to an average price of $4.82/kW-month while spot capacity prices fell 34% in the rest of the state to an average of $3.23/kW-month, the report said.

— Mary Powers

Indiana muni installing 120 MW of solar energyA public power agency that provides electricity to 60 cities and

towns in Indiana and Ohio is moving into solar energy in a big way, with plans to construct numerous utility-scale solar arrays totaling 120 MW over the next decade.

The Indiana Municipal Power Agency is embarking upon its journey to harness sunlight without a state government mandate or federal subsidies.

“I think it’s economical,” Raj Rao, president and CEO of Carmel, Indiana-based IMPA, said in an interview this week about his agency’s ambitious foray into solar energy. “We’re able to do this for 6-7 cents” per kWh.

For now, Indiana’s largest solar project is a 15-MW solar farm at the Indianapolis International Airport just east of the state’s capital city.

Indianapolis Power & Light, an AES Corp. subsidiary, buys all of the output from the facility.

IMPA’s sharp pivot to renewable energy, in particular solar, largely has flown below the radar. For years, the 30-year-old agency has relied almost exclusively on fossil fuels to supply its members — 59 in Indiana, one in Ohio. Together, they serve some 330,000 customers.

Of its roughly 1,200-MW generation portfolio, coal currently accounts for about 500 MW and natural gas about 450 MW, according to Rao, who has headed the organization since 1986.

Indeed, coal is not going away anytime soon at IMPA. The agency owns minority stakes in two relatively new baseload coal plants, the 1,600-MW Prairie State Energy Campus in Washington County, Illinois, and the 1,274-MW Trimble County plant in Trimble County, Kentucky. Prairie State and Trimble County’s 547-MW Unit 2 both went into commercial operation during the past five years.

IMPA also owns a share of 625-MW Unit 5 at Duke Energy Indiana’s 3,145-MW Gibson baseload coal plant in Gibson County, Indiana, one of the largest power plants in the Midwest.

RGGI carbon allowance futures, Aug 17 ($/allowance)ICE Settlement Volume

Dec15 V14 6.21 0Dec16 V14 6.41 0Dec17 V14 6.62 0Dec18 V14 6.83 0Dec15 V15 6.21 140Dec16 V15 6.41 0Dec17 V15 6.62 0Dec18 V15 6.83 0Dec15 V16 6.21 0Dec16 V16 6.41 0Dec17 V16 6.62 0Dec18 V16 6.83 0

The Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative is a carbon cap-and-trade program for power generators in nine Northeast and Mid-Atlantic US states. One RGGI allowance is equivalent to one short ton of CO2. The volume listed is the number of futures contracts traded. Each futures contract represents 1,000 RGGI allowances.

Daily CSAPR allowance assessments, Aug 18CSAPR ($/st) 2015 Range Mid 2016 Range Mid

SO2 Group 1 3.00-8.00 5.50 1.50-4.00 2.75SO2 Group 2 40.00-100.00 70.00 35.00-95.00 65.00NOx Annual 150.00-185.00 167.50 145.00-180.00 162.50NOx Seasonal 250.00-300.00 275.00 245.00-295.00 270.00

All prices in $/st

Page 14: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

14 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

Not replacing existing generationIMPA also owns gas-fired combustion turbines in Indianapolis,

Anderson and Richmond, all in Indiana.Still, Rao seems most excited in talking about the potential for

solar energy development within IMPA’s sprawling two-state footprint.

“We don’t have to do this ... there is no regulation,” he said, noting Indiana lacks a renewable portfolio standard, unlike many of its neighboring states. Repeated efforts over the past decade to get the General Assembly to enact a formal RPS have met with failure.

Rao said IMPA’s strategy is to initially construct arrays in member communities that would generate 1, 2 or 3 MWs of solar power. “By locating in the community, we are giving the property taxes to our own community.”

In 2016, IMPA intends to begin installing 5-MW solar units. “This is adding generation resources,” he said. “It’s economic that we’re doing that. We’re going to go slow, 10 to 12 (MW) every year.”

He stressed that solar energy is not expected to replace IMPA’s existing generation portfolio.

“We’re trying to make sure we have an appropriate portion of solar generation in our portfolio,” he said. “Basically, we are trying to locate in our communities, where [electric] distribution lines are available.

“Our goal is to get a megawatt a month on line.”— Bob Matyi

existing 758-MW combined-cycle facility in Sherman, Texas. The new capacity will come online in 2019, he said.

“This summer has provided a very good confirmation of the situation we believe ERCOT is in,” said Poray, referring to ERCOT’s recent demand records and low reserves. He said that while ERCOT has been estimating annual load growth of about 1.8%, Panda foresees load growth averaging 3%/year “and we don’t see much thermal generating capacity being built ... Next summer will be even tighter” from a supply perspective.

Panda has been among the very few developers adding gas-fired merchant capacity in ERCOT, Poray said. In addition to starting commercial operation of 758 MW of combined-cycle capacity at Sherman last year, Panda has brought online a total of 1,516 MW of combined-cycle capacity at its Temple, Texas, facility — 758 MW last year and another 758 MW this past spring.

Some other new thermal capacity is being built in ERCOT; for example, Exelon Generation recently started construction of a 1,104-MW combined-cycle expansion at its Colorado Bend facility in Wharton and an 1,085-MW combined-cycle expansion at its Wolf Hollow facility in Granbury.

Also, NRG Energy is constructing 300 MW of gas-fired combustion-turbine capacity at its P.H. Robinson facility in Galveston County, said NRG spokesman David Knox.

Panda plans for expected supply gap...from page 1

To build or not to build?However, many more gas-fired projects are in various stages of

pre-construction development, with no firm decisions by their developers that they will be built. NRG, for example, is planning two 850-MW, combined-cycle units — one at its S.R. Bertron station in Harris County and the other at its Cedar Bayou station in Chambers County — but has not yet committed to construct them, said Knox.

Also, the ReNu Power unit of ArcLight Capital is planning a 255-MW expansion project in Victoria; Apex Power Group is planning a project of up to 930 MW in Cherokee County; and Calpine is planning two 227-MW CTs in Marion.

Luminant, the largest generator in ERCOT, is developing several projects as well, including a combined-cycle unit of up to 812 MW in Tarrant County; and four 210-MW CTs — two in McLennan County and two in Hood County. In addition, a joint venture of Quantum Utility Generation and Navasota Energy Services is planning three roughly 600-MW peaking facilities in ERCOT.

John Fainter, president and CEO at Associated Electric Companies of Texas, said Tuesday that he thinks Panda — which is not a member of AECT— “is looking at the Clean Power Plan and the need for more gas-fired capacity” in ERCOT as the CPP is implemented.

Advertisement

@ICE_Markets

INTERCONTINENTAL EXCHANGE

LEADINGGLOBALENERGYMARKETS

THEICE.COM

Page 15: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

15 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

Fainter noted that while wind power will continue to play a major role in ERCOT, Texas’s recent heat wave confirmed that wind-farm output can fall short when power is needed most, and that gas-fired capacity will be needed to back up wind.

Asked to respond to Poray’s critique, ERCOT spokeswoman Robbie Searcy said the reliability council “continues to evaluate the performance of the revised load forecasting methodology implemented in February 2014. Within our current methodology, we have the ability to adjust some assumptions if we observe significant changes to trends over time.”

She added, “This is the first year since 2011 that ERCOT has exceeded its previous all-time record set during the hottest summer in Texas history, and we exceeded 2014 monthly demand in only four of eight months so far in 2015.”

— Housley Carr

addition of a marginal energy storage unit performing energy arbitrage in the US will increase system emissions of the existing generation fleet, assuming economics and emissions patterns similar to those of the 2010−2012 time period.”

Richard Green, professor of Sustainable Energy Business at the Imperial College of London, said he believes the study’s conclusion “for the US at present.”

“You could get a different result if the relative costs of gas and coal were the other way round ([which] has sometimes happened in Europe) as you’d then be saving on peak coal generation and using more off-peak gas,” Green said in an email Tuesday. “Also, if you had so much renewable output that some had to be constrained off when fossil plants were unable to turn down enough at times of low demand – this is starting to happen in Ireland and maybe in Germany – perhaps also in Texas if prices there are sometimes negative. At those times, extra demand equals extra renewables, not extra fossil.”

But Matt Roberts, Energy Storage Association executive director, said the Hittinger and Azevedo study is “not inclusive enough to give you meaningful results.”

For example, the study focused on bulk energy storage, rather than behind-the-meter storage, which might be used to store behind-the-meter solar generation, he said.

But Jim Carson, president and CEO of RisQuant Energy, an electricity market consultant based in St. Paul, Minnesota, discounted behind-the-meter storage as a significant factor in its value.

‘Very expensive’“Energy storage remains very expensive,” Carson said. “The

Tesla battery storage wall for homes costs $5,000 installed to store $1 worth of electricity, and that is viewed as a ‘breakthrough.’ Batteries won’t pique my interest until they are less than $500, which is where pumped hydro is already.”

Another factor that the ESA’s Roberts said is not considered in Hittinger and Azevedo’s modeling is how storage is now used to provide ancillary services, such as frequency regulation, which

Bulk energy storage increases emissions...from page 1

might negate the need for additional peaking generation.“The study itself sets up a very simplistic view of how storage

is used,” Roberts said.In Hittinger and Azevedo’s research, they modeled the net

emissions resulting from the economic operation of bulk energy storage in 20 Emissions and Generation Resource Integrated Database regions across the contiguous US, so designated by the US Environmental Protection Agency. The model assumes power is stored during periods of low demand and prices and sold in periods of high demand and prices.

“In many areas of the US, the marginal electricity generator at night is often a coal plant and the marginal generator during peak periods is a natural gas plant, meaning that storage is effectively displacing cleaner natural gas-generated electricity with coal-generated electricity,” Hittinger and Azevedo said in their paper.

Another factor in the Hittinger and Azevedo results is that the process of storing and releasing energy incurs energy costs, which means that more power must be generated to account for these losses, they said.

Energy storage would result in fewer emissions in only five of the 20 eGRID regions, and only if the storage charging and discharging operated at 100% efficiency, the study showed.

‘Findings ... will not surprise’“This finding may surprise policy analysts, but it will not

Advertisement

Energy and Capacity RFP

The Illinois Power Agency issued an RFP to procure:

• Energy blocks and capacity for the Ameren Illinois Company’s portfolio

• Energy blocks for Commonwealth Edison Company’s portfolio

The supply period for energy starts November 2015 while the supply period for capacity starts June 2016.

Deadline to submit qualification materials: Thursday, August 27, 2015.

Visit: www.ipa-energyrfp.com for more information

Illinois Power AgencyStandard Products RFP

Page 16: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

16 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

surprise anyone more familiar with the operation of the grid,” said Michael Giberson, Texas Tech University Center for Energy Commerce economist. “We have gained the impression that energy storage is a complement to intermittent renewables because it can help address the intermittency problem, but the day-to-day business of grid-based energy storage will be to buy at night and sell at afternoon peak. Simple ‘buy low, sell high.’ … The Hittinger and Azevedo study … demonstrates that the simple view is actually correct, and then elaborates on the simple view by exploring regional differences in emissions due to energy storage.”

The modeling shows that average revenue for storage facilities, using this time arbitrage tool, would be greatest in West Texas and smallest in Ohio.

Texas Tech’s Giberson pointed out that the push for energy storage has primarily come from policymakers, rather than from economics. For example, the California Public Utilities Commission in 2013 approved a 1,300 MW mandate for energy storage by the year 2020.

“Policy is likely to continue to push energy storage because of a halo-effect that comes from an association with renewable energy,” Giberson said in an email. “Perhaps analysis such as this one will help policymakers distinguish between energy storage and renewable energy, so therefore help diminish the policy push.”

In an interview Tuesday, Fares said he thinks that as a result of the Hittinger and Azevedo study, “there will be less times that states would push economic incentives for energy storage.”

“It really depends on how state policymakers interpret their findings,” Fares said.

Giberson said economics might play a larger role in the growth of energy storage in West Texas “because of the significant amount of wind energy existing and expected over the next few years.”

“The amount of intermittent wind capacity on the … West Texas transmission systems will likely create significant arbitrage opportunities to promote some investment into storage,” Giberson said. “Energy storage would improve the economics of wind energy a little, by moderating the dips in price during high-wind events, but it seems unlikely that the scale of investment in energy storage would have dramatic effects.”

— Mark Watson

PUC staff misses deadline...from page 1

The ESP proceeding already has been delayed, and most parties predict a final PUC order will not arrive until early 2016 even if the PUC hearing gets under way as planned on August 31. The hearing is expected to last well into October.

In a Friday filing, Thomas McNamee, an assistant state attorney general, asked the commission to void the August 14 deadline for the staff to submit testimony in the FirstEnergy case.

Instead, McNamee said, the testimony will be filed “when it becomes available. Staff needs additional time to prepare.” He did not elaborate.

McNamee could not be reached for comment Tuesday about how much more time the staff needs in a case that has dragged on for months.

But, “the subject came up in today’s pre-trial hearing, and the hearing examiner asked the staff to get it in as soon as possible,” Howard Petricoff, a veteran Columbus energy attorney who represents the Retail Energy Supply Association and some competitive electric suppliers, said in a Tuesday interview.

Staff testimony or not, PUC spokesman Matt Schilling said Tuesday the hearing has not yet been canceled.

“They’re moving forward for the thirty-first,” Schilling said, adding he was not certain if the hearing might be temporarily delayed until the testimony is submitted.

US non-hydro electricity storage capacity (MW)

Source: US Department of Energy

0

200

400

600

800

1000

201520142013201220112010

Compressed air

Flywheel

ThermalBattery

The BarrelThe Platts blog that spans the commodities spectrum

Read and respond to posts from Platts editors and analysts on issues affecting a wide range of the world’s energy, petchem, and agriculture resources.

Oil, Natural Gas, Electricity and Coal, Steel and Metals, Petrochemicals, Biofuels and Agriculture, Renewables

…as well as commentary, analysis and observations on everything from global politics, to market dy-namics. The Barrel strives to be the world’s most complete commodi-ties blog, and its comment section is always open for your thoughts.

Visit http://blogs.platts.com/ now!

Page 17: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Wednesday, august 19, 2015MegaWatt daily

17 Copyright © 2015 McGraw Hill Financial

Petricoff surmised the staff may be awaiting the public release of results from PJM Interconnection’s base residual auction earlier this month before filing its report. PJM is expected to make the results known next week, possibly on August 24.

Because of the PUC regulatory delays, FirstEnergy already has canceled a wholesale power auction that was scheduled for October under its new ESP, according to company spokesman Doug Colafella. A second auction set for January remains in doubt.

FirstEnergy CEO Chuck Jones recently said the PUC’s final decision on the ESP/PPA, and not the PJM auction, is likely to decide the fate of Sammis and Davis-Besse.

If the PUC ultimately approves the PPA, Sammis and Davis-

Besse would not necessarily have to clear the auction to continue operating, he said.

Schilling said FirstEnergy would lead off the hearing on August 31. After the company wraps up, stakeholder witnesses then would testify. As of now, testimony is scheduled through the first week of October.

Once the initial hearing ends, the commission is expected to hear rebuttal testimony. Then, a deadline will be imposed for legal briefs to be submitted. After that, the PUC will begin deliberations, an action that likely will take several weeks, making a final order before the end of 2015 problematic, at best.

— Bob Matyi

To reach PlattsE-mail:[email protected]

North AmericaTel:800-PLATTS-8 (toll-free) +1-212-904-3070 (direct)

Latin AmericaTel:+54-11-4121-4810

Europe & Middle EastTel:+44-20-7176-6111

Asia PacificTel:+65-6530-6430

Megawatt Daily is published daily by Platts, a division of McGraw Hill Financial. Registered office Two Penn Plaza, 25th Floor, New York, NY 10121-2298

Officers of the Corporation: Harold McGraw III, Chairman; Doug Peterson, President and Chief Executive Officer; Lucy Fato, Executive Vice President and General Counsel; Jack F. Callahan, Jr., Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer; Elizabeth O’Melia, Senior Vice President, Treasury Operations.

Prices, indexes, assessments and other price information published herein are based on material collected from actual market participants. Platts makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, adequacy or completeness of the data and other information set forth in this publication (‘data’) or as to the merchantability or fitness for a particular use of the data. Platts assumes no liability in connection with any party’s use of the data. Corporate policy prohibits editorial personnel from holding any financial interest in compa-nies they cover and from disclosing information prior to the publication date of an issue.

Copyright © 2015 by Platts, McGraw Hill Financial

All rights reserved. No portion of this publication may be photocopied, reproduced, retrans-mitted, put into a computer system or otherwise redistributed without prior authorization from Platts.

Permission is granted for those registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) to photocopy material herein for internal reference or personal use only, provided that appro-priate payment is made to the CCC, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, phone (978) 750-8400. Reproduction in any other form, or for any other purpose, is forbidden without express permission of McGraw Hill Financial. For article reprints contact: The YGS Group, phone +1-717-505-9701 x105. Text-only archives available on Dialog File 624, Data Star, Factiva, LexisNexis, and Westlaw. Platts is a trademark of McGraw Hill Financial.

Editorial Director, North American Gas and Power Pricing

Mark Callahan

Editorial Director, North American Gas and Power Content

James O’Connell

Global Editorial Director, Power

Sarah Cottle

Megawatt Daily Questions? Email:

NAGas&[email protected]

Manager North America Gas and Power Content

Rocco Canonica, +1-720-264-6626

Anne Swedberg, +1-720-264-6728

Editors

Jeff Ryser, +1-713-658-3225

Mark Watson, +1-713-658-3214

Spot Market Editors

Caitlin Laird, +1-713-303-1721

Kassia Micek, +1-713-655-2227

Eric Wieser, +1-202-383-2092

Correspondents

Housley Carr

Ethan Howland

Bob Matyi

Mary Powers

Volume 20 / Issue 159 / Wednesday, August 19, 2015

AdvertisingTel : +1-720-264-6631

1088-4319

Manager, Advertisement SalesKacey Comstock

ISSN #

MEGAWATT DAILY

Chief Content OfficerMartin Fraenkel

Platts PresidentLarry Neal

Page 18: PLATTS Megawatt Daily

Learn from Leading Experts:Eversource EnergyNextEra Energy, Inc.PSEG PowerISO-New EnglandPJMSunEdisonCompetitive Power VenturesARES ManagementGoldman SachsMoelis & Co.CIBCUBS Investment Research Macquarie Capital JP MorganStarwood Energy GroupAnd Many More!

For More Info or to Register:WEB: platts.com/financinguspower

PHONE: 800-752-8878 toll-free or 212-904-3070 outside the US and Canada

EMAIL: [email protected]

FAX: 1+857-383-5744

FOR SPEAKING OPPORTUNITIES, CONTACT:Erica Giardinatel: 857-383-5718 [email protected]

FOR SPONSORSHIP OPPORTUNITIES, CONTACT:Lorne Grout tel: 857-383-5702 [email protected]

FOR MEDIA INQUIRIES, CONTACT:Christine Benners tel: 857-383-5733 [email protected]

Financing US Power

Register by September 18, 2015 and SAVE $250

October 29-30, 2015 • New York Marriott Marquis • New York, New York

Distributed Generation, Capacity Performance Incentives, and the Shifting Landscape of the Integrated Utility Model

www.platts.com/financinguspower

Sponsored by:

17th Annual

NuScale Small Modular Reactors — A Financeable Nuclear Power Plant Jay Surina, Chief Financial Officer, NuScale Power Inc.

KEYNOTE

Supporting Organizations:

Understanding Market Conditions in Order to Make Sound Investment Decisions

• Distributed generation — How alternative resources are disrupting the traditional power generation mix and what this means for financiers• New plant-build — Which regions are expected to see new build and who is seeking investment for plant upgrades?• Capacity performance incentives — Could these improve the overall risk/return balance for new investment? • Integrated utility model — Which M&A opportunities might the changing utility business model generate?• EPA’s Clean Power Plan — What impact can this have on the future financing of power projects?• Renewables — Life without subsidies and how this may change the financing landscape for renewables• Gas supply/demand — Outlook on natural gas demand for 2016 and beyond