Commentary: Why Electric Rates Are Rising (October, 2014)

by Meredith Angwin 

Meredith Angwin
New England electricity is too dependent upon natural gas-fired power plants. And we are about to pay a lot for that dependence.

In recent days, several New England utilities have announced major price rises for electricity. In Massachusetts, National Grid said that its customers can expect a 37 percent rate increase in November. Liberty Utilities in New Hampshire announced that there will be a 50 percent rate increase, and Unitil, which serves Massachusetts, Maine and New Hampshire, announced a price rise that will add over $40 a month to the average home electricity bill. These companies explained that the rate increases are due to the increasing cost of power on the grid.

Why is the grid cost increasing? Part of the reason is supply and demand. Supply has decreased. Vermont Yankee (nuclear) and Salem Harbor in Massachusetts (coal) are shutting down and will not be available this winter. During the high demand resulting from the polar vortex in early 2014, New England needed about 20,000 megawatts of power. The grid barely scraped up enough to meet the demand. This year, 1,000 megawatts, or five percent of that power, is going off-line, and no new power plants have been built.

But perhaps a bigger problem is that the New England grid is far too dependent on natural gas. During the polar vortex cold snap, which affected all of New England, many natural gas power plants could not get enough gas to operate. It was being used to heat homes. New England is often described as “pipeline-constrained”: There are not enough pipelines for the natural gas we need.

The grid operator, ISO-NE, a nonprofit company, is responsible for ensuring a reliable electric supply on the New England grid. The way the grid operates is that some plants keep running steadily all the time. The steady-operation plants are nuclear, coal and some of the natural gas facilities — basically, plants that operate on a steam cycle. When demand is higher than these plants can supply, it is met by putting more gas-fired plants into service. However, last winter, many gas-fired plants could not operate.

ISO-NE foresaw this natural gas supply crunch and had a “winter reliability” program in place. It paid $70 million to oil-burning power plants to keep oil available to burn. This was a “capacity” payment. That is, the plants were paid just to have oil on hand. (This payment also increased our electric bills.) But during the polar vortex power crunch, the oil was not enough, and some jet fuel was also burned to make power. In other words, over-dependence on natural gas led to expensive alternatives: oil and jet fuel. Using these fuels caused major price increases.

Also, even without the crunch, the price of natural gas itself has doubled since its low point in 2012.

The two issues (supply and diversity of fuel sources) are going to intersect again this winter. With two power plants closed, a cold snap this winter will require more oil and jet fuel than was required last winter. Utilities are getting their rate increases lined up to deal with the coming price spike.

What about my own local utility? I live in Vermont, and Green Mountain Power told the press recently that because of its “efficiencies” it has lowered prices and will keep them low.

I do not believe prices will stay low in Vermont. GMP is subject to the same factors that affect the other utilities. It buys much of its power on the same markets. GMP also has large contracts with HydroQuebec. Unfortunately, these are “market-follow” contracts. When the market price rises on the grid, HydroQuebec will also raise the price that it charges GMP. Back in 2010, I wrote blog posts on how the new market-follow contracts were “a bad deal with HydroQuebec.” This winter, I suspect we will find out just how bad a deal they are.

What about renewables? For many reasons, renewable build-out is not happening very quickly. As of last year, less than 10 percent of Vermont’s in-state electricity generation was by renewables, not counting hydro.

Also, renewables are generally paired with natural gas (gas-fired plants are turned on when the wind dies down or the sun sets). So renewables are not going to be much help right now.

I was recently elected to be on the coordinating committee of the Consumer Liaison Group of ISO-NE. Along with 120 people from all over the Northeast, I attended its quarterly meeting in September. Everyone there seemed to have a tale of when the big price rises would hit their local utilities. Many are planning major price increases in January 2015.

What shall we do about these price spikes? Just as in our private lives, diversity is important. I think we need to be willing to accept diversity on the grid: nuclear plants and coal plants. Natural gas is an excellent fuel, but it seems to be the one and only fuel acceptable to many people. However, what is happening on the grid right now is a classic illustration of the old saying: “Don’t put all your eggs in one basket.” Our grid is close to just one basket right now (over 50 percent natural gas). The winter is coming, and power will be expensive if any eggs drop.

– Meredith Angwin of Wilder is a physical chemist who worked for electric utilities for more than 25 years and now heads the Energy Education Project of the Ethan Allen Institute.

{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }

Joe Fortner October 31, 2014 at 3:43 pm

There seems to be an irrational fear of nuclear-powered energy production, despite the fact that it creates little or no carbon emissions, premised presumably upon a hang-over from the China Syndrome and fond memories of the No Nukes Concert (which, of course, was powered in part by ConEd’s Indian Power power plant). Given where Vermont (and New England) is located, relying upon solar and wind is simply magical thinking. Until and unless the emotion-laden anti-nuke campaigns are set aside, and are replaced with an objective evaluation of energy needs and current (and redundant) safety systems, sadly the future is likely to be a combination of increased energy costs and constant campaigns to “do with less.” Neither will lead to better lives.


Scott Belanger November 22, 2014 at 6:32 pm

Irrational fears?
I suppose you are perfectly comfortable with having a nuke plant in your backyard. Tell the people in Fukushima and Chernobyl that their fears are irrational.
You are as propogandized as the next fool to imagine this fairy tale of infinite “clean” energy with “no waste”. Perhaps you have a lot in your yard to bury some spent fuel?
Better lives? Ha! I’d rather have less energy and adapt than to be living with the constant threat of a nuclear meltdown or a toxic leak in the ground water that no one will disclose to the public.


Norma Manning November 26, 2014 at 5:28 pm

Scott, Vermont Yankee is a five minute drive from my house and I work at the Vernon Elementary school across the street from the plant. I am perfectly comfortable with Vermont Yankee being in my backyard along with its forty two years of generation byproduct all safely contained in the area of a football field. What would freak me out would be living near a fossil fuel burning plant where byproduct spews into the air and with some, stored in a slurry pit.


ELK December 13, 2014 at 4:53 pm

I don’t think that the ” we haven’t had a Chernobyl yet” argument is sufficient when you consider that an accident from any of these aging plants could make a very large section of the East Coast uninhabitable for thousands of years. Too big a down side considering there are other options available. And no one has the right to gamble with this many lives just to make a few bucks.


Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post:

About Us

The Ethan Allen Institute is Vermont’s free-market public policy research and education organization. Founded in 1993, we are one of fifty-plus similar but independent state-level, public policy organizations around the country which exchange ideas and information through the State Policy Network.

Latest News

VT Left Wing Media Bias Unmasks Itself

July 24, 2020 By Rob Roper Dave Gram was a long time reporter for the Associated Press, is currently the host of what’s billed on WDEV as a...

Using Guns for Self Defense – 3 Recent Examples

July 24, 2020 By John McClaughry  The Heritage Foundation’s Daily Signal last week published eleven news stories about citizens using a firearm to stop a crime. Here are...

FERC ruling on solar subsidies could help Vermont ratepayers

July 21, 2020 By John McClaughry Last Thursday, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission finalized its updates to the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA), in what the majority...

The Moderate Left’s Stand for Free Speech

July 17, 2020 By David Flemming Harper’s Magazine, a long-running monthly magazine of literature, politics, culture, finance, and the arts, is hardly what you would call a ‘politically...

Trump’s Regulatory Bill of Rights

July 16, 2020 by John McClaughry “President Trump [last May] issued an executive order entitled  ‘Regulatory Relief to Support Economic Recovery.’ The executive order includes a regulatory bill...