What's Happening?
The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) has approved cost allocation pathways for Consumers Energy and Constellation Energy to recover expenses incurred due to U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) orders. These orders require the continued operation of power plants that were scheduled for retirement. Specifically, the costs associated with the 1,560-MW coal-fired J.H. Campbell plant in Michigan will be distributed across the Midcontinent Independent System Operator’s (MISO) northern and central regions. FERC rejected proposals to limit cost allocation to Michigan or include MISO’s southern region. Additionally, costs for operating two oil- and gas-fired units at Constellation’s Eddystone plant in Pennsylvania will be spread across the PJM Interconnection’s footprint. Consumers Energy reported spending $29 million in the first 38 days of the DOE order to keep the Campbell plant operational. The DOE can mandate power plants to operate for 90 days during emergencies under the Federal Power Act.
AD
Why It's Important?
This decision by FERC has significant implications for energy stakeholders and consumers. By approving cost allocation across broader regions, FERC ensures that the financial burden of maintaining essential power plants during emergencies is shared, potentially stabilizing energy supply in critical areas. However, this also means increased costs for ratepayers in the affected regions. The decision highlights the ongoing challenges in balancing energy reliability with economic impacts, especially as the U.S. transitions from fossil fuels to renewable energy sources. The litigation surrounding the DOE’s emergency order, led by Michigan’s attorney general and environmental groups, underscores the contentious nature of such regulatory decisions and their impact on public policy and environmental advocacy.
What's Next?
Consumers Energy and Constellation Energy will need to seek further approval from FERC to recoup their costs. Stakeholders may challenge the prudency of these costs, and parties involved in the litigation against the DOE’s order may request rehearing to preserve arguments for potential refunds if the order is modified. The broader implications of DOE’s authority under the Federal Power Act could lead to increased costs for ratepayers, potentially reaching $5.9 billion by 2028, depending on future orders to keep fossil-fueled power plants operational.
Beyond the Headlines
The decision reflects broader energy policy debates in the U.S., particularly regarding the role of fossil fuels in the energy mix and the transition to cleaner energy sources. The involvement of environmental groups like the Sierra Club and Earthjustice highlights the ethical and environmental dimensions of energy regulation, as stakeholders weigh the immediate need for reliable power against long-term sustainability goals.
