But now there is a more systematic assessment of that period from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. FERC describes its role thusly: “[It is] an independent agency that regulates the interstate transmission of electricity, natural gas, and oil. FERC also reviews proposals to build liquefied natural gas terminals and interstate natural gas pipelines as well as licensing hydropower projects.” And there’s more! Read here for that. FERC’s authority over electricity transmission (and other of its activities) covers every manner of generator, so its work overlaps into the nuclear realm.
FERC’s assessment of the cold snap from the transmission perspective is therefore very interesting, despite it having no mention of nuclear energy at all. Here’s the takeaway:
Not many months ago staff described the market effects of the extraordinarily low natural gas prices. Staff does not expect the historic prices at the high end of the spectrum to become the norm. However, the range in prices has tested some of the market systems and procedures used by the RTOs [regional transmission organizations] and ISOs [independent system operators] and revealed difficulty in achieving efficient market results in stressed system conditions.
This could provide an opportunity to say mean things about natural gas, but why? It can take care of itself. The real key point is the argument for energy diversity, as both nuclear energy and wind (notably in Texas) were champs at keeping the heat on. Natural gas showed some definite strains.
Spot natural gas prices at major Northeast points broke all previous records during the January 22 event, propelled by more severe and widespread system constraints. At Transco Z6 Non-NY, prices spiked to $123/MMBtu, while prices at Transco Z6 NY and Transco Z5 reached $120/MMBtu. Those active in the natural gas spot market were at times exposed to these record high prices. Similarly, as discussed in detail later, customers purchasing in the RTO energy markets were exposed to dramatic price spikes driven by high natural gas prices.
FERC is fair, though. While learning that the transmission hubs were stressed past their breaking point is hair-raising, they didn’t break. If the past winter showed anything, it’s that it can still get mighty cold for extended periods and many people depend on natural gas for heating, diverting it from electricity generation use. A few warm winters forestalled this lesson, but now it can be considered learned.
During the cold weather events, the historically high peak demand combined with high levels of generation outages placed the regions near their capacity in meeting system demand. The RTOs and ISOs declared emergency conditions on several occasions and some implemented emergency procedures, including emergency demand response, voltage reduction, emergency energy purchases, and public appeals for conservation. They issued several maximum generation warnings and some maximum generation actions during the period. A maximum generation action means that all generation is to be made available and that generators may be asked to produce in the emergency range of their capacity, above normal operating limits.
That’s the hair-raising part. But this is worth stressing:
It is important to note that the RTOs and ISOs cut no firm load during this period.
Fair is fair, after all. Natural gas works require an ongoing flow of fuel while nuclear energy plants will run without issue until a refueling outage – and those don’t happen during the winter or summer months. FERC’s report is a positive nuclear story only by implication, but a very potent argument for energy diversity.
---
It’s more a coincidence than anything else, but Bisconti Associates just released a poll that showed Americans highly engaged with the issue of energy diversity:
The survey shows that a near-consensus 94 percent of Americans believe it is "important to maintain a diversity of energy sources to supply our nation's electricity;" 75 percent believe it is very important to do so.
"Americans approach electricity from a very practical standpoint, and energy diversity equates with energy reliability," said Ann Bisconti, president of Bisconti Research Inc. Her firm conducted the national survey of public opinion with Quest Global Research from March 6-21.
94 percent! That vortex – may it never return - did a lot of good by focusing attention on energy diversity. Let’s see what the industry does with – and how it responds to - this information.
Comments
Single flaw is that it'll never break out into the voting mass lay public for its enlightenment to do any good!
Keep up the good work!
James Greenidge
Queens NY
What could help is having him start his own campaign like others have.
James Greenidge
Queens NY
Jim would like to see NEI take to the hustings to trumpet the wonders of nuclear energy. But frankly, while advertising campaigns can be useful (and NEI's Nuclear Matters campaign is pretty nicely thought out), they won't get you where you want to go by themselves. Government support, editorial backing, think tank and agency reports (like FERC's)have a far more consequential impact than advertising alone can do. Our blog posts pointing up the nuclear doings around us can be used to help make the case to our friends and acquaintances (and bring attention to non-obvious pro-nuclear documents like the FERC report).
The bottom line is, a lot of what NEI (and other similar organizations) does is invisible - not secret per se, just not directly seeable by advocates. But it's happening anyway and is often quite effective in sending the pro-nuclear message to those most able to do something useful with it.
Well it sure is invisible because people on the street all say nuclear is evil for over 40 years! Did the BP Oil Gulf get their name and mojo back this way?
You wrote:
NEI has an ad campaign going on that he may not be aware of and Exelon has one as well.
There is some irony in that comment. If people like Jim and I, who look carefully for positive messages about nuclear energy, are not aware of an ad campaign, that should be an indication that the campaign is a bit too quiet.
Nukes have a well deserved reputation for being self-critical, learning from best practices, and having strong knowledge management programs. I recognize that NEI rank and file employees are hard working people, but why do you get defensive when we point out that your leaders need to provide you with more resources?
You create great content, but wouldn't your effort be more successful if the large corporations that you represent would pony up a little more money to spread the word?
Mark Flanagan made the following statement:
Government support, editorial backing, think tank and agency reports (like FERC's)have a far more consequential impact than advertising alone can do.
Sure, but how do you think you are going to get the attention of the editors and the think tanks if you don't do your part and tell your story as loudly as you can, using the "bullhorn" of paid advertising.
Here's a little secret for you - the mainstream (aka commercial) media makes its money by selling ads. If you expect them to support your business, you need to support theirs. I know that most engineers believe the myth that journalists work hard to find stories and always tell the truth, but that is not really the way the world works.
By the way, you were a little gentle on FERC about its complete avoidance of the 'N' word.
Rod Adams
Publisher, Atomic Insights
Or maybe that it's not targeted to you guys which it isn't. We have media guys who track this stuff for us and for the month of March the campaign has made nearly six million impressions. Ads are placed in E&E News, WSJ, Washington Post, Facebook, Google search, Twitter, LinkedIn and Politico, to name a few.
wouldn't your effort be more successful if the large corporations that you represent would pony up a little more money to spread the word?
You guys seem to think we have an unlimited budget and resources. If it were only that easy.
Not knocking anyone or how to spend money but if you ask anyone off the street in the U.S. if they heard or saw anything good about nukes, some people aren't going to like the answer. Sure those six million aren't in Pango-Pango?
Reporters don't sell ads, editors don't sell ads, and they don't base their stories on what does sell ads. Those things are handled by different departments in any real news organization.
A lot of time is spent on this blog killing the messenger. It's not the media's fault the industry is facing many challenges. I don't see the New York Times, MSNBC, etc. setting up fracking operations.
James Greenidge
Queens NY