1-Click Energy: Managing Corporate Demand for Clean Power

Globally, more private businesses, especially Fortune 100 companies are generating their own electricity, investing in renewable energy facilities, and voluntarily purchasing renewable energy credits to cover their carbon footprints. This shift could have a significant impact on the existing energy delivery system. On the one hand, this shift shows positive momentum toward the incorporation of clean energy into a fossil fuel dominated grid. As the negative impacts of climate change accelerate around the globe, decreasing reliance on fossil fuels is certainly an important goal. On the other hand, corporate disruption of what has historically been a highly regulated public service industry could result in a slippery slope of market power and loosened consumer protections, lost profits and stranded costs for utilities, and increased utility bills for the remaining customers. This Article recommends changes to the current regulatory scheme that would (1) go further to protect customers from multinational corporate wholesale sellers of electricity and (2) allow utilities to plan and collaborate earlier with large corporate customers to meet their clean energy demands

Vanishing Power Lines and Emerging Distributed Generation

Experts predict that distributed energy will contribute as much as twenty percent of the U.S. power supply by 2020. While no one will wake up tomorrow morning to an entirely new energy distribution system — complete with solar panels on the roof and a wind turbine in the back yard — distributed generation is receiving significant attention as the disruptive technology that will ultimately revolutionize the way energy is delivered in the United States. The reason for this shift is, in part, due to new technology that allows for more flexible localized generation of energy, and in part due to a changing climate resulting in frequent and violent storms that destroy large-scale energy infrastructure. A variety of distributed energy technologies are available today, including solar photovoltaic panels, battery storage, and micro turbines. These innovative technologies are not only appealing to today’s tech-savvy customers they are also becoming more economically accessible to the average customer. This shift in customer behavior will directly threaten the current energy delivery model. The more customers utilize distributed generation the less customers rely upon the transmission grid. Remaining customers will bear a higher burden of the transmission costs. The higher the cost of electricity to the remaining customers, the more likely those customers will seek out on-site generation as well. It could result in a vicious cycle for an unprepared utility company. Another significant threat to the current energy delivery system is climate change. Increased ambient air temperatures, increased (and more severe) storms, flooding, and sea level rise have all exposed the vulnerabilities in the traditional central energy delivery system. For example, transmission infrastructure and generation facilities are vulnerable to physical damage during storms, fires, and floods, and they operate less efficiently in hotter temperatures. Distributed generation is emerging as a viable alternative that is less susceptible to these changing weather patterns, in part because it utilizes little to no transmission infrastructure and the generation facilities are located on-site, or near the end user. Utilities and regulatory agencies will need to develop a more sustainable energy delivery system in the face of these climate and technological changes. Given that distributed generation appears to be a “culprit” in disrupting the traditional energy delivery model as well as a potential “solution” to a new, more sustainable, model, the focus should, at least in part, be on the flexible inclusion of distributed generation. Unfortunately, in recent years, energy laws and policies—such as Renewable Portfolio Standards and Multi Value Project policies—have instead promoted and facilitated large-scale energy development, resulting in billions of dollars being spent on unsustainable energy delivery systems. Policymakers will need to work to undo these damaging policies

Hydropower: It\u27s a Small World after All

Global warming is here. As exhibited by the recent droughts, heat waves, severe storms, and floods, climate change is no longer a question for the future, but a reality for the present. Of the many ways to help combat climate change, this Article discusses the use of the most abundant renewable energy source on the plant-water. While it is unlikely that large, conventional hydropower will see any significant development in the near future, technologies have advanced so as to allow for the generation of a substantial amount of electricity from small hydropower facilities, including conduit and hydrokinetic projects. These technologies produce clean, renewable energy without greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions and without significant impacts to fish, wildlife, or the environment. Development of these small hydro projects, however, has been stymied in part due to an antiquated, cumbersome, and expensive regulatory scheme intended for largescale hydropower development. Without significant regulatory changes, development is, and will continue to be, cost-prohibitive for many projects. More small hydropower resources would be developed if the federal government delegated to the states the authority to license these projects, either through legislation or, more likely, through delegation agreements between the federal government and the states. Granting licensing authority to the states would result in more efficient and less expensive licensing, but would still allow for thorough site-specific evaluations and solutions. The shift in oversight to the states would likely result in stronger local community ownership over sustainable renewable energy projects that would provide an economic benefit to the community and also contribute to the global fight against climate change. Without a regulatory change, the United States\u27 stated policy goal of promotion of renewable energy development, including small hydropower, will remain just that-a goal-and will struggle to become reality. This Article provides crucial information and direction for options to facilitate the needed regulatory change and analyzes the benefits-both local and global-of such a change. Part I of this Article will explore the history and rise of hydroelectric power generation-from water mills to mega dams-and its regulation in the United States. The water mill was one of the first mechanisms used by mankind to harness power. It is a simple use of momentum to create energy. Water mills were used to grind grain, saw logs, create textiles, and fashion tools. As societies evolved, so did the use of water mills, and once electricity and generators arrived on the scene in the late 1800s, hydropower proved to be an efficient means of producing electricity. By the early twentieth century, 40% of the electricity in the United States was produced from hydropower projects located on rivers within or near cities. With the increased utilization of hydropower came a new regulatory scheme introduced in the Federal Water Power Act of 1920. This Act granted nearly exclusive regulatory authority to the federal government-and the Federal Power Commission specifically-over hydropower facilities located on navigable waters. The Commission (now FERC) remains the preeminent regulatory body, deciding whether development should occur and if so, by whom and how. Significant hydropower development occurred during this era, with both the federal government and large utilities constructing the majority of the United States\u27 mega dams. Part II will discuss the decline of hydropower utilization, resulting in fewer hydropower facilities being developed in the United States. This Article will discuss several factors that have contributed to the decrease in development, including increased environmental scrutiny, an increasingly complicated licensing scheme, and poor public perception of dams. While electricity generated from hydropower is inexpensive, emission free (i.e., non-polluting), and comes from a renewable source, hydropower ultimately came under scrutiny by states and environmental groups in the late 1960s and early 1970s as water quality and environmental concerns began to take form in the United States. In response to these concerns, Congress enacted several statutes intended to protect the environment and natural resources, including the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act, National Environmental Protection Act, and the Endangered Species Act. The implementation of these acts placed hydropower under increased environmental scrutiny, resulting in increased costs and delays in development. The Clean Water Act tangled the regulatory web further by requiring hydropower developers to obtain a certificate from the state in which the project will be located, certifying that the facility will not impair water quality and will meet other limitations set by states to ensure such compliance. In addition to these regulatory obstacles to development, hydropower has also suffered from a negative public opinion and an increasing attitude toward river restoration instead of hydropower development. As a result of these obstacles, large-scale hydropower is unlikely to see increased development in the United States in the near future. Part III will discuss how small-scale hydropower is not-or at least should not be-similarly situated to large, conventional hydropower. Studies have shown that small-scale hydropower, if fully developed, could increase current electricity generation by up to 200%. Unlike conventional large-scale hydropower, small hydropower has very little impact on the environment, fish, or wildlife and still provides clean, renewable energy. Regardless of the benefits to small hydropower development, there are significant regulatory hurdles to increased development, including antiquated and prohibitive licensing and regulatory schemes created for regulation of large, conventional hydropower. While small hydropower projects-including conduit and hydrokinetic projects-can apply for federal exemptions to the current licensing scheme, those exemptions are not in fact exemptions to licensing, but to relicensing. For the initial license, projects must still go through the three arduous consultation stages with potentially dozens of resource agencies, multiple design and environmental studies, and lengthy application requirements for the exemption. Part IV will address ways to untangle this web of regulatory oversight, including delegating to the states the responsibilities for licensing, which would streamline the consultation phases of the licensing process and make small hydro licensing less time-consuming and less expensive. States would pre-screen the projects, ensure applications are complete, and identify any necessary consultations and studies so as to satisfy all licensing requirements. FERC would maintain oversight authority of state programs to ensure they are consistent with federal policy and that hydropower development is consistent among the different states. This would presumably encourage all states to ensure they are following the appropriate goal of promoting small hydropower development while protecting natural resources, fish, wildlife, and recreational opportunities. The most promising ways to accomplish this transition to state oversight are either through legislative changes modifying the Federal Power Act or through delegation agreements such as Memorandums of Understanding. Each option will be discussed in detail. Finally, this Part will also address the local and global benefits of increased small hydropower development by creating jobs and stimulating the economy while also playing a part in the overall fight against climate change

Vanishing Power Lines and Emerging Distributed Generation

Experts predict that distributed energy will contribute as much as twenty percent of the U.S. power supply by 2020. While no one will wake up tomorrow morning to an entirely new energy distribution system — complete with solar panels on the roof and a wind turbine in the back yard — distributed generation is receiving significant attention as the disruptive technology that will ultimately revolutionize the way energy is delivered in the United States. The reason for this shift is, in part, due to new technology that allows for more flexible localized generation of energy, and in part due to a changing climate resulting in frequent and violent storms that destroy large-scale energy infrastructure. A variety of distributed energy technologies are available today, including solar photovoltaic panels, battery storage, and micro turbines. These innovative technologies are not only appealing to today’s tech-savvy customers they are also becoming more economically accessible to the average customer. This shift in customer behavior will directly threaten the current energy delivery model. The more customers utilize distributed generation the less customers rely upon the transmission grid. Remaining customers will bear a higher burden of the transmission costs. The higher the cost of electricity to the remaining customers, the more likely those customers will seek out on-site generation as well. It could result in a vicious cycle for an unprepared utility company. Another significant threat to the current energy delivery system is climate change. Increased ambient air temperatures, increased (and more severe) storms, flooding, and sea level rise have all exposed the vulnerabilities in the traditional central energy delivery system. For example, transmission infrastructure and generation facilities are vulnerable to physical damage during storms, fires, and floods, and they operate less efficiently in hotter temperatures. Distributed generation is emerging as a viable alternative that is less susceptible to these changing weather patterns, in part because it utilizes little to no transmission infrastructure and the generation facilities are located on-site, or near the end user. Utilities and regulatory agencies will need to develop a more sustainable energy delivery system in the face of these climate and technological changes. Given that distributed generation appears to be a “culprit” in disrupting the traditional energy delivery model as well as a potential “solution” to a new, more sustainable, model, the focus should, at least in part, be on the flexible inclusion of distributed generation. Unfortunately, in recent years, energy laws and policies—such as Renewable Portfolio Standards and Multi Value Project policies—have instead promoted and facilitated large-scale energy development, resulting in billions of dollars being spent on unsustainable energy delivery systems. Policymakers will need to work to undo these damaging policies

Executive Summary

This 2013 Survey on Oil & Gas provides an annual summary, bringing together the judicial, regulatory, and legislative activities of thirtyfour states. In addition to the typical court cases addressing lessee and lessor disputes, two apparent overarching themes have emerged this year. First is a heightened regulation of, and litigation regarding, hydraulic fracturing and its potential negative environmental impacts. At the forefront of these potentially negative environmental impacts are concerns for water quality and quantity, earthquakes, and increased air pollution emissions. Second, several states are reporting litigation over leases issued by the Bureau of Land Management, mostly claiming a failure to prepare (or a deficiency in preparing) environmental impact assessments

Executive Summary

2011 was a year full of Energy. One could not open a (virtual) newspaper without seeing an article or commentary on energy-related issues, such as the U.S. Supreme Court\u27s decision in American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut regarding greenhouse gas ( GHG ) regulation, the future of renewable energy, and natural gas extraction via hydraulic fracturing, to list a few. GHG emissions, renewable energy development, and hydraulic fracturing have historically been left to the states to police; however, the Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) is set to commence regulation of GHG emissions as early as May 2012 and is currently studying hydraulic fracturing and its potential impact on drinking water. Regardless of the EPA\u27s activities, it will be interesting to see how states address these issues over the next year

Executive Summary (2012)

2011 was a year full of Energy. One could not open a (virtual) newspaper without seeing an article or commentary on energy-related issues, such as the U.S. Supreme Court\u27s decision in American Electric Power Co. v. Connecticut regarding greenhouse gas ( GHG ) regulation, the future of renewable energy, and natural gas extraction via hydraulic fracturing, to list a few. GHG emissions, renewable energy development, and hydraulic fracturing have historically been left to the states to police; however, the Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA ) is set to commence regulation of GHG emissions as early as May 2012 and is currently studying hydraulic fracturing and its potential impact on drinking water. Regardless of the EPA\u27s activities, it will be interesting to see how states address these issues over the next year

The Future of Energy: The European and American Approaches -- The American Approach

Presentation by Professor Gina S. Warren in which she provides an idea of the energy mix in the United States, where energy comes from, and what it is used for. Professor Warren then discusses U.S. energy policy and climate change proposals. She also covers numbers and indicators from an April 17, 2013 U.S. Department of Energy (“DOE”) report outlining projections in energy through 2040

Hydropower: Time for a Small Makeover

Over the last several years, hydropower has supplied between 6 and 8 percent of the electricity consumed in the United States. It is the most abundant, most efficient, and least expensive source of renewable electricity generation on earth.Yet, when most people think of hydropower they think of huge dams, dead fish, and a destroyed environment. Unfortunately, this perception has on too many occasions been a reality. Hydropower needs a new PR department. It is time for a small makeover. To embrace the full potential of sustainable hydropower, investors and regulatory agencies must look to develop small, localized facilities on existing infrastructure. Unlike large conventional hydropower, small and low flow hydropower facilities require less water flow and can be placed in conduits, canals, locks, and other areas that are less affected by climate change decreases in river levels. The environmental impact of small hydropower is generally minimal. It diverts less water, and does not require creation of dams and reservoirs. Furthermore, small hydropower can be developed near populated areas, especially if located on existing infrastructure, which makes it a valuable distributed generation energy source. This Article will discuss some of the advantages of distributed generation over centralized generation. Distributed generation is generally cost-efficient and environmentally-friendly because it takes up very little space and requires little to no construction of transmission and distribution systems. It is also less susceptible to blackout and damage as a result of storms, which are becoming more frequent and severe due to a changing climate. In addition to guidance on locating these small facilities, regulatory agencies should continue to take steps to allow a more streamlined licensing scheme for small hydropower. The current licensing scheme requires--with few exceptions--that small projects undergo the same complex licensing process as large projects, such as construction of another Hoover Dam. The process is expensive--costing several times that of the technology itself. The process is time-consuming--often taking up to five years to complete. It requires multiple levels of consultation-often with dozens of parties. And, all of this must occur prior to issuance of a license to operate. As will be discussed, the federal government and some states have taken steps to make the process more efficient; however, more can and should be done