Search
`
November 7, 2024

Posted on

MISO Midwest-South Transfer Service on Outage until July

MISO said last week that the transmission line linking its Midwest and South regions has been out of commission since December and is expected to remain offline until July, raising the cost of energy transfers.

The RTO said it will replace the contract path capability between its regions with non-firm service on April 10 until the line returns to service. It said members should prepare for “financial and operational implications.”

The 1,000-MW contract path, a 500-kV Associated Electric Cooperative Inc. line, went offline Dec. 10. The line, which stretches from southern Missouri into northern Arkansas, is MISO’s only physical tie between its Midwest and South regions. MISO said it expects the line to remain on an extended outage through June 30, leaving it dependent on non-firm transfers from neighboring grids.

During a Thursday Market Subcommittee meeting, senior adviser Jack Dannis said a Dec. 10-11 tornado outbreak that bombarded the central and southern U.S. took out 17 towers and four miles of the line. He did not specify which state the line damage occurred in.

The tie was originally expected to be back in service by the end of February. Dannis said he couldn’t speculate on whether the work requiring the outage would be extended beyond June.

Clean Grid Alliance’s Natalie McIntire said she was surprised that MISO waited so long to report the status of the contract path.

“This happened in December, and the first I heard about it … was yesterday,” she said. “I’m wondering why MISO hasn’t alerted stakeholders to this beforehand.”

McIntire pointed out that the grid operator’s leadership has delivered two executive updates to stakeholders since the line went down. Neither mentioned the line’s outage.

As a rule, MISO doesn’t reveal specific generation or transmission outages on its system.

Andy Kowalczyk, with activist group 350 New Orleans, said he was also concerned that staff didn’t communicate the significant outage, especially considering that a winter storm passed through the area a few weeks later.

Dannis said MISO only recently became aware of the outage’s extension into summer. He said the RTO will replace the firm capacity with “non-firm, as available” transmission capacity after it exhausts its four-month grace period, according to a usage agreement of the line with SPP, AECI and other joint parties. The agreement provides that the grid operator can pay an additional $667/MW-month “for every decreased megawatt of contract path capacity.”

Assuming the line is back in service by July, MISO would need to pay about $1.3 million to secure 1,000 MW of non-firm transfer capability. It will divide the cost among market participants using its current market-based allocation design that assigns costs based on excess congestion across its regional directional transfer constraint.

Kevin Vannoy, director of market design, said though MISO’s usual 1,000-MW contract path becomes non-firm because the physical line is out of service, it can still flow up to its usual 2,500-3,000 MW non-firm transfers under its agreement with SPP and the joint parties.

“We think there’s enough physical transfer capability on the system to continue operating as we normally have,” he told stakeholders.

However, Vannoy said it’s possible that conditions might force MISO to order transmission loading relief to reduce transfers. The RTO’s use of non-firm transfers can be curtailed down to zero to prevent load shedding or during system emergencies.

Minnesota Public Utilities Commission staffer Hwikwon Ham asked whether MISO has considered a hypothetical heat wave striking it and SPP at the same time, forcing transfers to be curtailed.

Staff said they’re increasing coordination with members but haven’t devised any special mitigation plans.

Stakeholders questioned why MISO didn’t make updates to either its spring reliability outlook or the delivery estimates in its capacity auction because of a major transmission line’s loss.

Dannis said MISO has been operating for three months now with “minimal” operational impacts. He said he expects little difficulty during the shoulder maintenance season.

MISO Director of Settlements Laura Rauch said the impacts should be strictly financial.

“We can still operate as we normally do. This is about dollars, not anything that would preclude us from operating,” she said.

Stakeholders asked why it’s taking six months to complete line repairs.

Dannis said he was aware of some supply chain issues for equipment needed to fix the line but said he couldn’t offer anything further.

Posted on

Court Again Rebukes FERC for Failure to Review Downstream Emissions

The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday handed more fuel to FERC’s Democratic majority for its new policies on natural gas infrastructure, ruling that the commission has to take another shot at reviewing downstream greenhouse gas emissions from a Massachusetts compressor project.

The court granted a petition for review and remand from Food & Water Watch, which had challenged FERC’s approval of a project by Tennessee Gas Pipeline to upgrade a compressor station in Agawam, Mass.

“The commission’s environmental assessment failed to account for the reasonably foreseeable indirect effects of the project — specifically, the greenhouse gas emissions attributable to burning the gas to be carried in the pipeline,” Judge Sri Srinivasan wrote in the court’s opinion.

The environmental group had argued that FERC’s decision failed to comply with the National Environmental Protection Act in four ways, and the court agreed with one of those arguments: that FERC failed to adequately consider the effects of the emissions associated with the consumption of the gas that the project would carry.

The commission had asked for data from Tennessee Gas, and the pipeline company provided them, but FERC found the information was “too generalized” to estimate downstream emissions at all, an argument which the court rejected.

The court relied heavily on its 2017 decision in Sierra Club v. FERC, better known as “Sabal Trail,” a similar case in which the Sierra Club challenged FERC’s approval of three pipelines in the Southeastern U.S.

“Our decision in Sabal Trail points the way to concluding that the available information was sufficiently specific to render downstream emissions reasonably foreseeable,” Srinivasan wrote.

The court ordered FERC to “perform a supplemental environmental assessment in which it must either quantify and consider the project’s downstream carbon emissions or explain in more detail why it cannot do so.”

Well Timed for Glick

The ruling will fit neatly into the argument that FERC Chairman Richard Glick has been making around his decision to revamp the commission’s pipeline approval process to more closely consider emissions, which has been challenged by Republicans and even some Democrats in Congress.

In a Senate hearing just days before the latest ruling, Glick pointed specifically to the D.C. Circuit’s past opinions to defend his move to update FERC’s policy statement governing natural gas infrastructure certificates. (See Glick: No Regrets over Gas Policy Statements.)

“The D.C. Circuit has spoken on several occasions, and unless the court’s interpretation is reversed, we have no choice but to follow with unambiguous guidance,” Glick said.

The changes “will lead to project orders that are more legally durable,” he added.

Things Left Unsaid

The ruling notably did not take a position on the “significance” of downstream emissions, but only whether FERC has a duty to tally them.

“We see nothing that provides any view on whether FERC has the authority to require mitigation of those emissions as a general matter,” ClearView Energy Partners wrote in its analysis of the ruling. “Since FERC did not make a call on significance in this case, and the petitioner failed to properly raise it, this case provides no incremental insight into this issue.”

The court also didn’t shed any light on the assessment of upstream emissions or the use of the social cost of carbon, so those will have to be adjudicated in future cases. “Those fights still lie ahead,” ClearView wrote.

Reactions

“Today’s decision adds to a growing list of cases affirming that FERC is required to consider these climate impacts,” said Sarah Ladin, an attorney at the Institute for Policy Integrity at the New York University School of Law.

“More broadly, today’s decision affirms that the commission’s new policy statement is an appropriate action to ensure it properly considers greenhouse gas emissions in assessing pipeline applications,” Ladin wrote in a statement.

Gillian Giannetti, a senior attorney at the Natural Resources Defense Council, wrote that FERC’s work on the Agawam project was the “kind of shoddy review that FERC aims to correct in updating its policy statements.”

“It doesn’t benefit anyone for FERC to lose over and over and over on this issue,” she tweeted.

Posted on

New Washington Law Gives Low-income Residents Solar Access

Washington’s legislature last week passed a bill to provide low-income residents access to solar energy through community-based projects.

The Senate approved an amended House Bill 1814 by a 29-20 margin on Thursday, followed passage by the House on a 57-41 vote.

The bill by Rep. Sharon Shewmake (D) will establish a new community solar incentive program through Washington State University’s Extension Energy Program to provide benefits for low-income residents, low-income service provider subscribers and tribal and public agency subscribers.

The program will provide grants to community solar project administrators, which can include utilities, nonprofits, tribal housing authorities and other local authorities.

A grant under the program would be limited to 100% of the installed costs of a project, in addition to associated start-up administrative costs, capped at $20,000 per project. Eligible projects must be between 12 and 199 kW in nameplate capacity and have at least two low-income subscribers or one low-income service provider.

The projects may also include energy storage.

The bill allocates $300,000 for the program in fiscal 2023, increasing the allocation to $25 million for each of the four subsequent budget biennia. At least $2 million of the money is to be directed to tribal programs.

Grant applicants would have two years to complete the project.

Republicans opposed the bill because it is expensive and does not help combat climate change, Sen. Lynda Wilson (R) said.

Sen. Reuven Carlyle (D) argued that the bill would make solar energy more viable for low-income people, who normally cannot afford to the energy source.

Posted on

Retiring WPP Head Foresees Increased Collaboration on Western RA

Outgoing Western Power Pool (WPP) President Frank Afranji envisions a deepening relationship between his organization and WECC as the WPP rolls out its Western Resource Adequacy Program (WRAP) over the next two years.

On the cusp of retiring from the WPP after leading the organization for four years, Afranji shared his views on the WRAP at a WECC Board of Directors meeting last Wednesday.

“This is probably the last presentation I make before I retire at the end of this month … and I’m sure many people out there are looking forward to seeing me gone,” he joked.

The WRAP came about because of a confluence of factors in the Western Interconnection, Afranji told the board. Two of those factors — the decommissioning of coal-fired generators and increased adoption of variable energy resources — largely stemmed from state clean energy policies. The third — reduced surplus hydroelectric capacity in the Northwest — was the product of that region’s load growth.

“As time passed on and loads increased, it became very evident that we’re going be heading into capacity adequacy problems,” Afranji said.

In April 2020, the WPP (then called the Northwest Power Pool) announced its intention to develop a resource adequacy program to help address looming capacity shortfalls in the West. (See Western Resource Adequacy Program in the Works.)

Two months after the WPP announced the RA effort, WECC laid out plans to redefine its own organizational mission by becoming the primary forum for discussing and tackling resource adequacy challenges in the West. (See WECC Seeks to ‘Invent’ Future with RA Forum.)

The overlapping pursuits could have spelled competition over which entity would become the authority on RA issues in the West.

Afranji anticipates a more collaborative outcome.

“In my mind, as WECC works on their own capacity assessment of the West, there is such a point of interaction on this that we have to work hand-in-glove on this, no different than we’re working with the [California] ISO,” Afranji said.

Afranji lauded WECC for being at the forefront of the Western capacity issue through its work on the Western Assessment of Resource Adequacy (a regional companion to NERC’s RA assessments), which he thinks the regional entity should continue to produce. (See WECC Warns West Heading for Resource Adequacy Shortfalls by 2025.)

“If anything, as we get the [WRAP] up and running, I think we should intensify the work, and my instructions to the staff have been always, ‘As soon as we get something that we could really say is working, we need to work closely with the WECC,’” he said.

Afranji also noted that WPP COO Greg Carrington has been asked to join WECC’s Joint Guidance Committee. “So there are many points of interconnection.”

On Track

Addressing the progress of the WRAP, Afranji said the “train is on the track, and it’s moving.”

“I have to say we ended up with an amazing group of folks working on this probe project from across the West.”

Afranji explained that the WRAP will be divided into two pieces. The first is the forward showing program, designed to demonstrate the resource adequacy and availability from participants seven months in advance of a program season.

The second piece, Afranji said, is the operational program, which will determine the WRAP’s capacity requirements.

“What are we going to need, going forward, to create these efficiencies and to have a much better planning reserve margins?” he said.

The operational component will also help WPP to determine the capacity contributions of various resources, including hydro, run-of-river hydro, pumped storage, wind and solar.

Once that part of the program is in place, participants will submit their resource portfolios to the WPP to assess deficiencies, which will need to be “cured” ahead of the operational season.

WPP teams are currently working to calculate the WRAP’s specific “qualifying capacity contributions.”

“Historically, people would just throw out a number for their own wind or their own solar or their own run-of-the-river,” Afranji said. “Our teams zeroed in on different zones, different areas, different technologies, to figure out what truly is the qualifying capacity contribution of a certain element in a certain area, so that when we do the assessment, it’s not really just a socialized number that may not really contribute much to reliability.”

Fixing a Misnomer

Richard Campbell, vice chair of the WECC board, pointed out that when the WRAP begins its binding forward showing program in 2023, major electricity consuming and producing regions will still sit outside its footprint, resulting in “suboptimization” of the RA process.

“How do you plan to sort of deal with these other large areas and entities that are outside of your purview?” Campbell asked.

Afranji said the WPP has already been meeting with CAISO regarding seams issues to ensure that their respective operations “are not going to clash or not really be in sync.”

“And certainly we’re working with SPP, because we hired SPP to be the [program operator], meaning we’re using their infrastructure to go ahead and implement the program on a contractual basis,” he said.

Afranji also explained the reason behind the Portland, Ore.-based WPP’s recent name change.

“Since 1942 we’ve been known as the Northwest Power Pool, but it started becoming very clear that this is a misnomer, because our footprint extends way beyond that … and with that the various executives of the participants urged us to really look at a name that is more descriptive of our footprint.”

The WPP currently has 44 members, 26 of which will initially participate in the WRAP.

Posted on

Climate-related Land Use Bill Stalls Again as Wash. Session Ends

Parliamentary delay tactics by legislative Republicans last week killed a Washington bill to add climate change considerations to city and county land use planning.

House Bill 1099, sponsored by Rep. Davina Duerr (D), would have made the change by revising Washington’s Growth Management Act (GMA), which regulates long-range land use planning for Washington’s city and county governments. It requires counties and cities to review and, if needed, revise their comprehensive plans and development regulations every eight years.

GOP tactics in the Washington Senate and House led to the bill’s death in the last evening of the legislature’s 2022 short session, which could not go beyond midnight Thursday. The session ended at about 11:30 p.m.

Duerr’s bill would have added “environmental resiliency” as a goal of the GMA and required the concept to be considered in land use and shoreline planning for the 10 largest of Washington’s 39 counties and in cities of 6,000 people or larger. The 10 largest counties cover Puget Sound, Spokane, the Yakima River Valley and the Washington-side suburbs of Portland, Ore. A 2021 legislative memo said 246 county and city governments would be affected, including 110 jurisdictions outside the 10 most populous counties.

The bill called for city and county comprehensive plans, development regulations and regional plans to “address jurisdictional needs for resilience to changing conditions and protect and enhance environmental, economic, and human health and safety,” according to the bill’s report.  

It would have also required the state Department of Commerce to set guidelines by 2025 on how covered areas can reduce greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled. Because 45% of Washington’s greenhouse gas emissions come from motor vehicles, traffic issues would become a priority in those guidelines.

Going into Wednesday, the House and Senate held different versions of the bill and had to go into compromise talks. While the differences were quickly hammered out, the majority Democrats in both chambers added language to allow cities to add real estate tax breaks based on being within a quarter mile of a transit station. The idea is to encourage higher housing density around transit stations to cut down on car traffic. 

The real estate tax breaks were not in either version of HB 1099 prior to Wednesday.

At Thursday’s floor vote, Senate Republicans challenged the extra language as being illegally beyond the scope of the bill. Lt. Gov. Denny Heck’s staff researched the challenge for hours before Heck decided the addition was technically legal. As the Senate’s presiding officer, Heck’s duties include ruling on such matters.

“I don’t feel good about this one. This was a very, very difficult issue … This was not a clear case,” Heck said.

The Senate then passed the bill 28-21 along party lines.

Talking the Bill to Death

As Thursday evening unfolded, House Democrats faced a big debate on large operations and transportation budget packages. House Republicans told House Speaker Laurie Jinkins (D) that all 41 GOP members planned to speak in the debate on House Bill 1099. Jinkins said that that would stretch the floor debate, preventing one of two budget packages — both opposed by the Republicans — from passing before the midnight deadline. 

“It was possible for the Republicans to kill the bill just by talking. … We got a clear message that it would be talked to death,” Jinkins said.   

At Wednesday’s conference committee meeting, Rep. Mary Dye (R) argued the bill in its present form could have unintended consequences, but she did not elaborate further on what they could be. “We don’t have answers to the impacts of this sweeping policy. … I think it is premature to make a policy of this scope,” Dye said.

Duerr countered Wednesday, saying the issue “needs a sweeping solution.”

On Thursday, Republicans argued that adding climate change to the Growth Management Act will increase housing costs at a time when Washington is facing a housing shortage 

Senate Minority Leader John Braun (R) said Democrats “decided climate change is the most important thing. … But the citizens of Washington are in the middle of a housing crisis. … This does harm to the people of Washington by driving up the costs of regulation.”

Democrats painted housing and climate change as parallel problems, not as an “either-or” situation.

“It’s important that we act now on climate change. It’s important that we act now on housing,” said Sen. Liz Lovelett (D). The legislature has passed several housing-related bills this session.

This was the second failed legislative session for Duerr’s bill. (See Land Use Climate Bill Gets Second Life in Wash. Legislature.)

In 2021, the House passed the bill and the Senate Ways and Means Committee recommended approval, but it stalled in the Senate’s Transportation Committee. The proposal would require comprehensive plans, development regulations and regional plans to support state greenhouse gas emissions targets and improve resilience against climate impacts and natural hazards.

In 2021, the Senate Transportation Committee was chaired by then-Sen. Steve Hobbs (D), a moderate who sometimes crossed party lines. Gov Jay Inslee later appointed Hobbs as secretary of state to replace Kim Wyman, who joined the Biden administration as an election security expert. Liberal Sen. Mark Liias (D) replaced Hobbs as transportation committee chairman, and the bill sailed through that committee this year.

Posted on

Annual RA Survey Adjusted for MISO’s Seasonal Capacity Market

The annual resource adequacy survey conducted by MISO and the Organization of MISO States will become more frequent as the RTO moves to seasonal capacity auctions.  

“One thing you couldn’t help but notice is MISO is moving to a seasonal construct,” MISO adviser Stuart Hansen joked during a Resource Adequacy Subcommittee (RASC) meeting Wednesday. “The question has been, will the OMS-MISO survey follow suit? … The short answer is ‘yes.’”

Hansen said staff has begun conversations with OMS staff and regulators and is “hashing out details internally.” He said the organizations will update stakeholders at future RASC meetings and have a new process in place by the third quarter. The changes will affect 2023-24 planning year readiness.

Hansen said the RTO is strengthening its data import capabilities so market participants aren’t overwhelmed with requests for four times the amount of usual information. He said staff envisions market participants responding to the survey once per year for all seasons.

However, MISO’s plans for seasonal capacity auctions are in doubt following FERC deficiency letters on the grid operator’s minimum capacity obligation proposal and its bid for a four-season capacity market using a resource’s past availability for accreditation. (See related story, Deficiency Notices for MISO’s Seasonal Capacity Auctions Bid.)

MISO plans to post what could be its final annual auction results on April 14. The grid operator has 177 GW of installed capacity, 136 GW in members’ confirmed unforced capacity, a 122-GW coincident peak forecast and a 135-GW planning reserve margin requirement.

Eric Thoms, the RTO’s senior manager of resource adequacy operations, said that confirmed unforced capacity values could still rise as members verify capacity amounts with MISO.

Stakeholders are pushing staff to reinstate a brief stakeholder teleconference to discuss auction results. MISO has historically hosted a call to review auction results the day after releasing them, but it has decided to replace this year’s discussion with a presentation during the April 20 RASC meeting.

Stakeholders said the day-after call is useful, particularly when zones clear at unusually high prices or capacity export limits bind.

“A typical, run-of-the-mill auction probably doesn’t need a workshop, but interesting results require one,” WEC Energy Group’s Chris Plante said.

MISO staff said they would reassess the need to schedule a call.

Posted on

SERC Gives Spring Checkup on Transmission Line Ratings

Maintaining bulk electric system reliability is similar to maintaining personal health, Tim Ponseti, SERC vice president of operations, said at the regional entity’s Spring Reliability and Security webinar Tuesday.

That begins with preventative measures, such as outreach and education about risks. SERC has “had 13 straight board meetings where we’ve highlighted the various issues, common failure modes, best practices and things to look out for regarding facility ratings,” Ponseti said.

Inaccurate transmission line ratings can cause a system operator to lose real-time situational awareness, or to operate equipment beyond its capabilities, damaging it or causing lines to sag beyond design, which could result in unplanned and potentially widespread outages.

Eighty-six percent of FAC-008 violations in SERC’s footprint are related to discrepancies between documented facility ratings and actual field conditions, said Dulce Plaza, SERC legal counsel, who offered a sneak peek at a report the RE will release later this month.

“If you give operators a rating, they’re going to operate to it, right or wrong, so it’s important they have good numbers and data to operate from,” Ponseti said in giving his own presentation. Planners use facility ratings to design capital projects and future improvements to the grid, so accurate facility ratings have a far-reaching impact. “Whether it’s every one, two, three or four years, we’ve touched base and given health checkups essentially covering almost 90% of our transmission models and generation megawatts in our footprint.”

Operations and planning audits often run into missing or altered equipment, or jointly owned equipment, said Heath Martin, SERC senior O&P auditor, who closed the session with a presentation on “things to think about.”

Road Debris (SERC) Content.jpgSERC

Equipment might need special consideration when applying the facility ratings methodology, generally older equipment that has older construction practices and clearance thresholds, perhaps older equipment in general that may not meet current standards, Martin said.

He showed a picture of a painted white line marking the edge of a country road that curved around a fallen branch.

“‘It’s not my job to remove that limb, so I’m just going to paint around it and keep going’; that is not the correct attitude when it comes to jointly owned facilities,” Martin said.

Posted on

Deficiency Notices for MISO’s Seasonal Capacity Auctions Bid

FERC doled out two deficiency letters to MISO Wednesday over the grid operator’s plans to institute a four-season capacity market, availability-based resource accreditations and a 50% minimum capacity obligation.

The commission said it lacked several specifics on the resource adequacy overhaul, including a fuller defense from the RTO of the minimum capacity rule’s new accreditation and deadline information.

MISO late last year sought FERC’s approval to perform four seasonal capacity auctions with separate reserve margins by 2024 and apply a seasonal accreditation based on a generating unit’s past performance during tight system conditions (ER22-495).

The RTO also made a related filing to establish a minimum capacity obligation that requires a load-serving entity to demonstrate it has secured at least 50% of the capacity required to meet their peak load before the voluntary auctions (ER22-496).

Stakeholder reactions have been mostly negative. They have said a stricter accreditation based on risky hours that can’t be predicted with certainty would result in volatility and unfair penalties to generation. Others also have said staff hasn’t explained the reliability problems the minimum capacity obligation is meant to correct. (See MISO’s Seasonal Capacity Proposal Opposed at FERC.)

The commission told MISO “quantitative evidence” that demonstrates historical performance of units is “more indicative of future performance during emergency periods” than the existing unforced capacity accreditation process.  

FERC said it was interested in seeing analyses that show the need for a higher reserve margin requirement in the winter than the summer in some zones during certain years. It asked why MISO intends to clear four seasonal auctions simultaneously instead of conducting sequential, single-season auctions. The commission also said it needed a rationale as to why the RTO would allow clearing prices in a single season to exceed generation’s cost of new entry.

The commission asked MISO to explain why it wasn’t similarly ascribing seasonal variability to its planning reserve margin analysis and local clearing requirements within resource adequacy zones. It also asked what steps the RTO will take to establish a seasonal planning reserve margin and how the new availability-based resource accreditation will factor into loss-of-load calculations.

FERC said it was unclear whether MISO intended to use different predicted risky hours across different units for accreditation. It also asked whether a unit’s performance in other seasons would be used as a basis for accreditation in another season.

The commission said it did not understand why the grid operator didn’t extend the availability-based accreditation beyond thermal resources to its solar and wind resources, which are under an existing accreditation that’s also based on availability during times of system need.

FERC also asked for justification in requiring its demand response resources to increase their availability for more calls in a seasonal paradigm versus an annual construct.

Finally, the commission asked MISO to more fully explain its requirement that units replace their capacity if they’re on outage longer than 30 days when there is a requirement for a 120-day period between a unit’s planned outages.

On the minimum capacity obligation, FERC wondered why the RTO said it will initially apply the obligation on a systemwide basis and then transition to a subregional application of the rule in 2025.

The commission asked MISO to explain how it settled on a five-month period for a market participant that receives an obligation before submitting proof it will meet 50% of its load before. It also asked the grid operator to describe the health of its bilateral market and the ability of market participants to secure excess capacity.  

Posted on

MISO: 2021 Member Savings Exceeded $3B

MISO said Wednesday that it saved members more than $3 billion over the course of 2021.

The grid operator said its value proposition analysis showed a range of $3-$3.8 billion in savings for members that participate in the markets only through bilateral contracts.

The value proposition measures the collective annual savings for members. Last year, MISO estimated it saved its members around $3.5 billion in 2020. (See MISO Touts $3.5B in 2020 Savings for Members.)

The grid operator said on average, it saves its membership about $3.4 billion annually.  

MISO said it quantifies benefits through the more efficient use of generation, reduced need for new generation, and the stronger reliability that comes with a resource sharing pool. The grid operator said it has tracked about $36.3 billion in savings since 2007.

The diverse geographic footprint offered the biggest value to members in 2021, saving them $1.7-$2.3 billion, the RTO said. It said differing loads and diverse generation sources has allowed it to operate with a reserve margin of 17.9%. It had been more than 20%.

The grid operator said the system’s additional wind generation has yielded $467-$530 million in savings. MISO also said its ability to optimally dispatch the most economic energy in its real-time and day-ahead markets saved members anywhere from $471 million to $521 million over the year. It estimated savings from heightened reliability at $285-$310 million.

“Our grid is changing at a rapid pace, and MISO is working closely with our member utilities to better understand how their plans will impact the MISO grid,” Wayne Schug, vice president of strategy, said in a press release accompanying the report. “We are committed to ensuring MISO’s value proposition evolves and aligns with the changes impacting our members and MISO.”

Posted on

Massachusetts Startup Pitches Event Waste Management for Cleantech Accelerator

The startup G Force Waste Sorters is trying to disrupt the waste industry and reduce greenhouse gases by recovering high-value, post-consumer recyclables from trash at major sports and entertainment venues.

Michelle Guiney, president of Massachusetts-based G Force, pitched the startup Wednesday at a virtual event for the Cleantech Open Northeast accelerator program, answering the question, “Why venue trash?”

Between 40 and 50% of trash at large event venues is recyclable and 20 to 30% is compostable, according to Guiney.

“To exponentially increase the volume of trash sorted, I designed a mobile mechanical waste-sorting system that will be able to defer up to 80% of the venue trash from landfill or incineration,” she said.

For context, she added, one venue with a seating capacity of 40,000 generates about 1,200 tons of trash annually. G Force could recover 600 tons of recyclables and 360 tons of compostables from the facility’s annual waste while also helping avoid 2,300 metric tons of carbon dioxide (MTCO2).

“It’s an unprecedented environmental benefit for just one venue,” Guiney said.

An Outdoor Media Buyers ranking of U.S. arenas and stadiums includes 141 facilities with seating capacities between 40,000 and 107,000, putting the minimum emissions avoidance potential for the G Force business model in those locations around 325,000 MTCO2/year. The yearly avoided emissions could equate to removing 71,000 internal combustion engine passenger vehicles from the road, based on EPA vehicle emissions estimates.

The anticipated environmental benefits of G Force’s business are what technology accelerator Cleantech Open looks for in companies applying to become a new cohort member. With the support of sponsors, the Northeast arm of the national program works in partnership with the Northeast Clean Energy Council to help early-stage startups that have an environmental focus.

Companies chosen for a cohort receive training, mentorship, investor connections and opportunities to compete for cash prizes.

The mentoring part of the program is a “great process” for mentor and mentee, said Mark Dockser, professor of practice at Northeastern University’s D’Amore-McKim School of Business, and a Cleantech Open mentor.

“For the mentors, it’s a chance to meet and work with some great folks who have very similar interests and different expertise,” Dockser said during the event Wednesday. “For the mentees, it’s a chance to learn to analyze, to vet ideas, to do some problem solving … and get to market to find some of the right partners.”

Mentors for cohort members match the specific needs of the startup business model, according to Andrew Myers, professor of civil and environmental engineering at Northeastern. Myers and Jim Papadopoulos, a senior research engineer at Northeastern, won the 2020 Cleantech Open NE for their startup T-Omega Wind.

The team won for a redesigned floating offshore wind turbine that could reduce material costs and simplify manufacturing.

“The go-to-market strategy that we conceived of as part of the Cleantech Open in 2020 is the one that we are now fleshing out and including in our pitch deck for investors the spring,” Myers said during the event.

Startup applications for the 2022 Northeast cohort are due April 17. The administrators will select cohort members in May and announce program winners at an event in September, when the cohort’s top startups will have a chance to pitch in a public form.