Skip to main content

The PJM Capacity Auction and Nuclear Energy

Matt Wald
The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior director of policy analysis and strategic planning at NEI.

There’s an important change in the electricity system that starts with an auction taking place this week. The organization holding the auction is big in the electricity world but you may never have heard of it, and the thing being auctioned is obscure, too, so let me explain.

The organization is called PJM, which once upon a time stood for Pennsylvania-Jersey-Maryland, but now it covers those states plus parts of 10 others. It runs the electric system stretching all the way from Delaware to Chicago. Some of the transactions it manages are second to second, some are in intervals of a few minutes. This one is year by year.

The thing being auctioned is not energy, but capacity. When you measure energy, you spin the little wheels on an old-fashioned electric meter. But capacity means the ability to generate. If you are a utility and you’ve got customers to serve in the PJM market, you have to buy capacity equal to the highest amount your customers are going to demand.

Capacity is a little like the size of the water pipes that a city builds. It doesn’t matter if you can supply enough water in 24 hours; you’ve got to supply it when its needed, or on a hot day, the fire hydrants and the toilets must not run dry. And somebody’s got to pay for that capacity, namely the water customers.

The same is true in electricity. Generators get paid for energy but they also get paid for capacity, for being ready to supply when you switch on your air conditioner or your microwave. Or the computer you’re using to read this blogpost.

PJM tracks this very carefully, and each day calculates the expected demand, and the amount of capacity on hand.



PJM has held capacity auctions for a while now, but this one is a little different, because PJM has changed the rules a bit. This year in this auction, you get paid more if you are a reliable generator. If you are a natural gas plant and you had to shut down during a polar vortex because you couldn’t get enough gas, or a coal plant that has to shut down when it can’t get enough coal, then you’re not a high-reliability supplier. Under the new rules, if you sell your capacity but then fall down on the job, you can face financial penalties.

We hear a lot lately about growing wind capacity. Wind can enter the capacity auction, but it’s discounted 87 percent. That means if you’ve got a 100 megawatt wind farm, it’s treated as 13 megawatts, because you can’t count on more than that. Solar is discounted 63 percent, which means if you’ve got 1 megawatt of solar, you can enter 380 kilowatts.

Why is this important? Because in PJM, the way you decide what power plants to build and what power plants to operate is based on the income you get from electricity customers.

Nuclear plants run about 90 percent of the hours in a year, and they operate reliably through peak periods, like the hottest summer days and the coldest winter nights. Nobody is certain how this auction is going to come out, but the experts think that prices will rise a bit, and nuclear plants will get a little more income.

Reactors don’t get paid for being carbon-free or for not producing the pollutants that lead to smog. It’s important that they at least get paid for being there when the system needs them. Reactors face challenges in this period of cheap natural gas and heavily-subsidized wind, and a stronger capacity market won’t solve those problems. But it will help a bit.

ADDENDUM: The results are in, and the auction will help reactors, but not some of the most threatened. Exelon is considering the retirement of five reactors whose profitability has been hurt by competition from low natural gas prices and subsidized wind. One such plant, Quad Cities, did not clear in the auction, meaning that it will not receive any revenue for its capacity during the period auctioned, the year that begins on June 1, 2018. If the plant is operating, though, it will earn revenue from selling energy. (Two other Exelon reactors did not clear, Oyster Creek, which is already identified for closure later in this decade, and Three Mile Island.) Exelon said the results of the auction would “begin to level the playing field.” Capacity prices varied by region, but some rose by more than a third.

Comments

Leslie Corrice said…
I must admit I didn't grasp the importance of the PJM auction. But, this article makes me think that I now have a clue. Good job.
Victor Shmulz said…
One thing left out was the use of energy efficiency savings to fuel the PJM market.

Popular posts from this blog

How Nanomaterials Can Make Nuclear Reactors Safer and More Efficient

The following is a guest post from Matt Wald, senior communications advisor at NEI. Follow Matt on Twitter at @MattLWald.

From the batteries in our cell phones to the clothes on our backs, "nanomaterials" that are designed molecule by molecule are working their way into our economy and our lives. Now there’s some promising work on new materials for nuclear reactors.

Reactors are a tough environment. The sub atomic particles that sustain the chain reaction, neutrons, are great for splitting additional uranium atoms, but not all of them hit a uranium atom; some of them end up in various metal components of the reactor. The metal is usually a crystalline structure, meaning it is as orderly as a ladder or a sheet of graph paper, but the neutrons rearrange the atoms, leaving some infinitesimal voids in the structure and some areas of extra density. The components literally grow, getting longer and thicker. The phenomenon is well understood and designers compensate for it with a …

Missing the Point about Pennsylvania’s Nuclear Plants

A group that includes oil and gas companies in Pennsylvania released a study on Monday that argues that twenty years ago, planners underestimated the value of nuclear plants in the electricity market. According to the group, that means the state should now let the plants close.

Huh?

The question confronting the state now isn’t what the companies that owned the reactors at the time of de-regulation got or didn’t get. It’s not a question of whether they were profitable in the '80s, '90s and '00s. It’s about now. Business works by looking at the present and making projections about the future.

Is losing the nuclear plants what’s best for the state going forward?

Pennsylvania needs clean air. It needs jobs. And it needs protection against over-reliance on a single fuel source.


What the reactors need is recognition of all the value they provide. The electricity market is depressed, and if electricity is treated as a simple commodity, with no regard for its benefit to clean air o…

Why America Needs the MOX Facility

If Isaiah had been a nuclear engineer, he’d have loved this project. And the Trump Administration should too, despite the proposal to eliminate it in the FY 2018 budget.

The project is a massive factory near Aiken, S.C., that will take plutonium from the government’s arsenal and turn it into fuel for civilian power reactors. The plutonium, made by the United States during the Cold War in a competition with the Soviet Union, is now surplus, and the United States and the Russian Federation jointly agreed to reduce their stocks, to reduce the chance of its use in weapons. Over two thousand construction workers, technicians and engineers are at work to enable the transformation.

Carrying Isaiah’s “swords into plowshares” vision into the nuclear field did not originate with plutonium. In 1993, the United States and Russia began a 20-year program to take weapons-grade uranium out of the Russian inventory, dilute it to levels appropriate for civilian power plants, and then use it to produce…