No proof exists that New England native fuel distribution corporations engaged in practices to withhold pure fuel pipeline capability on the Algonquin system to drive up fuel or energy costs within the area, Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) workers revealed.
FERC on February 27 closed an inquiry after conducting an “in depth overview” of the allegations—which it mentioned it took “very severely”—made by authors from the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), the University of California at Santa Barbara, the University of Wyoming, and Vanderbilt University in an October 2017 working paper.
The white paper alleges that “extreme, simultaneous worth spikes” skilled in New England’s wholesale pure fuel and electrical energy markets have been “exacerbated by some fuel distribution corporations scheduling deliveries with out really flowing fuel” moderately than by restricted pipeline capability serving the area, as has been generally thought. It factors, particularly, to “clear patterns of withholding” at a subset of supply nodes operated by Avangrid and Eversource, two corporations which have each fuel distribution and energy producing property available in the market.
The paper’s authors, Levi Marks, Charles F. Mason, Kristina Mohlin, and Matthew Zaragoza-Watkins, estimated that capability withholding elevated common fuel costs by 38%, and energy costs by 20%, over a three-year interval of examine, which started in August 2013 and resulted in July 2016, leading to a $three.6 billion hike paid by prospects in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont. The paper acknowledges that whereas the “studied habits” could have been inside the corporations’ contractual rights, it underscored the necessity to enhance regulation and coordination of fuel and energy markets in New England.
A Flawed Study
But on February 27, FERC workers, which mentioned it reviewed public and private information to research the allegations, mentioned it decided the examine was “flawed and led to incorrect conclusions in regards to the alleged withholding.” The company supplied few different particulars. It added: “FERC’s Office of Enforcement’s Division of Analytics and Surveillance routinely screens wholesale pure fuel and energy markets to search for potential market manipulation and every other inappropriate habits.”
Eversource Energy, which delivers energy, fuel, and provides water to about 4 million prospects in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire, informed POWER that FERC’s findings affirm the corporate’s long-standing assertion that “the defamatory claims made by the EDF have been uninformed and inaccurate.”
The firm in December put EDF on discover that it could pursue authorized motion if the environmental group didn’t halt its “false and defamatory statements” concerning Eversource’s gas-purchasing practices. As it publicized a cease-and-desist letter addressed to EDF—which it underscored was an “extraordinary step” for the corporate—Eversource mentioned the white paper was “fully unsupported by any legit information.”
On February 27, Eversource additionally made public an evaluation carried out by advisor agency Levitan & Associates that concludes “EDF’s allegations are uninformed, baseless, and quixotic.”
According to Richard Levitan, principal of Levitan & Associates, in the course of the a number of months wherein it analyzed the allegations made by EDF, the consulting agency recognized “important areas” the place EDF didn’t account for “the essential rules underlying Eversource’s obligation to its prospects. Namely, that the corporate is required to have enough fuel assets readily available to handle climate fluctuations, back-stop supply failures by third-party suppliers, and meet different demand uncertainties in order that prospects don’t endure the lack of fuel provide in the course of the coldest durations,” he mentioned in a press release launched by Eversource.
However, whereas FERC’s…