Keep up with CUB!
sign up for e-news

What have we done for YOU lately? Since 1984, CUB has saved Oregon ratepayers more than $3.4 billion dollars.

>> read more

« Opportunities to Talk, to Shop, and to Receive CFLs Free | Main | Small Cases Can Have Large Consequences »

November 02, 2005

Dividing Up the BPA Pie

A series of meetings is underway to decide how the biggest source of low-cost energy in the Pacific Northwest Region will be divided and distributed among consumers. The source of energy is the federal hydropower system, which is administered by the Bonneville Power Administration (BPA), and the ongoing discussion is called the Regional Dialogue. BPA's energy is produced primarily as hydropower generated by dams on the Columbia River System (including those on the Snake River) and also by one still-operational nuclear plant in Washington State. Since Woody Guthrie sang of the Columbia River, "your power is turning our darkness to dawn, so roll on Columbia, roll on," many groups have been jockeying to obtain a share of the Columbia's massive power for themselves.

BPA's current customers, or constituents, include public utilities of the Northwest, large industrial customers, and residential and small farm customers of investor-owned utilities (IOUs) such as Pacific Power and Portland General Electric. Because the federal hydropower system is limited, it is important that this cheap hydropower be allocated fairly among all these constituents. CUB's staff attorney, Jason Eisdorfer, sits on the Principals Management Group and is one of the only consumer group representatives advocating for residential customers at the Regional Dialogue table, where everybody wants to maximize their piece of the pie. Other stakeholders include the Northwest's Indian Tribes, fishermen's associations, and environmental groups. The Regional Dialogue involves a complex set of issues, but one we thought was worth talking about.

Although customers of IOUs receive a fraction of the value of low-cost power that public power customers receive, they have still tended to be perceived as a cost to the federal system by BPA. This is because IOUs receive low-cost power through a program called the Residential Exchange, which was set up in 1980, and involves a shifting of numbers rather than an actual flow of energy. When BPA sells power through the Exchange, it actually writes the utility a check for the difference between the utility's cost of power (purchased or generated from elsewhere by the utility) and the cost of BPA's lower-cost (mostly) hydropower. The amount of this check gets passed through to residential customers as a reduction in rates. The Exchange is important in that it is the mechanism that provides residential customers with their portion of the value of the federal power system.

The public utilities, on the other hand, simply purchase the power they need from BPA, for the inexpensive price of about $.03 per kilowatt hour, a rate called the Priority Firm or PF rate, and very highly valued by those who have it. People in other parts of the country would love to have this rate. And, in fact, CUB and others in the Northwest regularly have to fight back efforts from other parts of the country to try to force BPA into selling its power at market rates, sending the increase in revenue back to Washington, D.C. to pay off the expanding federal deficit. Another concern is the uncertainty in BPA's revenue stream that is created when some of its customers come and go, following the short-term energy market. This has become an increasingly popular and yet dangerous choice in the last decade, as the market has become more volatile.

The proposed solution to these concerns is locking in long-term, 20-year contracts for BPA power. In this way, BPA is freed from the uncertainty of wavering revenues, and the federal government receives a steady stream of income from the BPA system, while at the same time being prevented from tying its customers to the vast fluctuations of market costs. The downside of 20-year contracts is that you lock in agreements based on a set of conditions that are like a snapshot in time, conditions which are bound to change in unexpected ways over the course of two decades. So, for example, some of the issues of long-term contracts that CUB has emphasized -- and stakeholders are discussing -- include:

1) What percentage of the system do residential customers get? (This, of course, is a priority issue for CUB.)

2) How much does BPA commit to spending on renewable energy resources and energy efficiency programs?

3) Does BPA invest in more generating facilities or do individual utilities make those investments? And how do we ensure adequate investments are made, not knowing what energy demands will be in future years?

4) What happens if a new public utility is formed during the 20-year contract (for example, what if PGE were to go public)? Is a new public utility shut out of PF rates?

The decisions made in this Dialogue will affect rates for customers in Oregon for years to come. We are working hard to try to ensure that everybody gets a fair slice of this federal power pie, in particular keeping an eye out for residential customers' access to BPA lower-cost power, since we are one of the only advocates for residential Exchange customers at the table. At the same time we feel it is important to give a fair hearing to other stakeholders who are working to protect our environment, our Native Tribes, or our larger regional economy.

BPA is hoping to bring groups together in consensus and reach a Regional agreement within the next several months.

Posted by Oregon CUB at November 2, 2005 09:53 AM

Comments

CUB E-News This is probably one of the clearest, most succinct statements of the problem I've ever read. Can you pass that on?

Posted by: Liz Frenkel at September 11, 2006 04:06 PM

Hey there,

Thanks for this great summary - no one else has done this that I've seen. This is directly related to my PhD research, so I'm delighted to see it.

I would clarify: residential customers of IOUs - obviously residential consumers of public utilities already benefit.

But my real question is: are these meetings open to the public? And do you know when/where/how often they meet? If they're not open, I may be able to confer with my old colleagues at the NW Power & Conservation Council to see if they could get me in as a research observer. But since you wrote this, I thought I'd ask to see if you know.

Thanks!!! Eve

Posted by: Eve Vogel at September 11, 2006 04:07 PM

I am pretty sure that the meetings are open to the public, as I created a fuss to make sure they are. Check out this web site. It has a number of good documents, including drafts of compromise proposals on individual issues, and schedules of both the principals group meetings and the technical group meetings, where the real agreement would be hammered out, if there is one. I do not see why the public cannot attend.

http://www.bpa.gov/power/pl/regionaldialogue/

Jason Eisdorfer
CUB Program Director

Posted by: Jason Eisdorfer at September 11, 2006 04:09 PM


CUB E-News, Thank you for the newsletter. Below are some on my thoughts in response to the proposals on dividing up the BPA pie. Thanks for your involvement in this issue, for keeping us informed, and for your interest in hearing feedback. Marge Stevens, Corvallis
--------------------
Regarding the "inexpensive price of about $.03 per kilowatt hour... try to force BPA into selling its power at market rates, sending the increase in r= evenue back to Washington, D.C. to pay off the expanding federal deficit..."

Perhaps this is an unrealistically low rate - and does not count full costs - consider the extinction of Salmon, loss of native cultural and fishing grounds; maybe higher rates would provide funds to mitigate some of these uncounted costs, and would better encourage conservation of energy

Maybe the collection of higher fees could be applied regionally, rather than sent back to DC to pay off the foolish deficit, to pay for development of alternative, renewable energy infrastructure to allow reduced power production by hydropower for fish-friendly changes in dam structures or wholesale removal of dams and nuclear facilities which have no solution for disposal of nuclear waste

We will always need protection from unscrupulous businesses like Enron

Posted by: Marge Stevens at September 11, 2006 04:11 PM



consumer tips

Tired of telemarketing calls? Maybe it's time to put your number on the national Do Not Call list.

>> more information


multimedia

This 10-minute video, produced by Eric Stachon of Sky High Creative, gives a look at CUB’s history, why Oregon needed CUB to begin with, and goes on to talk to some of our current allies and key players in the world of utility regulation today.

>> click here for the video
(Right-click to save the video to your desktop before viewing)

     
©2005 Citizens' Utility Board of Oregon