|
|
|
|
|
People's Counsel Says Choice Utilities' Proposed Energy Storage Programs Risk Undermining Competition From Non-Utility Storage Developers
The following story is brought free of charge to readers by VertexOne, the exclusive EDI provider of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
The Maryland Office of People's Counsel said in a news release that, "Ratepayers should not be forced to cover the costs of utility proposals to acquire and own energy storage devices located on customer properties because it would impede the developing competitive market for storage and could expose all customers to high costs".
OPC filed comments with the Maryland PSC that also, "stressed the need for robust cost-effectiveness testing and bill impact analysis for utility storage programs."
"Batteries and other forms of energy storage will be a critical part of the State’s energy resource mix," People’s Counsel David S. Lapp said. "It’s critical that we get costs right and ensure that the involvement of utility monopolies in the market doesn’t stifle competition."
OPC filed its comments following the PSC's January 2025 order that required utilities to file proposals for the cost-effective procurement of 750 megawatts of storage to help meet Maryland’s ultimate energy storage goal of 3,000 MW by 2034. As described by OPC, the General Assembly set the goal in 2023 legislation, and had directed the Commission to establish the Maryland Energy Storage Program to achieve such goal, mainly through "cost-effective" competitive procurements.
"In response to the Commission’s procurement directive, Maryland’s Exelon utilities -- Baltimore Gas and Electric, Pepco, and Delmarva Power & Light -- filed a joint proposal for the utilities to own both large storage projects connected to the interstate electricity transmission system and smaller projects located on customer properties. OPC argued that for many projects, customers are more likely to benefit from procurements for storage that is owned by third parties," OPC said
"OPC also challenged the Exelon utilities’ proposal to keep for itself 30 percent of annual wholesale market revenues from third-party-owned storage when those revenues exceed the contract costs of obtaining the storage. The Exelon utilities propose to keep those revenues, even as they propose that ratepayers should bear all the risk for paying the costs of the storage contracts if revenues fall short of costs" OPC said
Copyright 2025 EnergyChoiceMatters.com. Unauthorized copying, retransmission, or republication
prohibited. You are not permitted to copy any work or text of EnergyChoiceMatters.com without the separate and express written consent of EnergyChoiceMatters.com
April 4, 2025
Email This Story
Copyright 2025 EnergyChoiceMatters.com
Reporting by Paul Ring • ring@energychoicematters.com
|
|
|
|
|