Dominion Resources
|
Protestor kneeling before Virginia State Police at an anti-Dominion protest, 2016 February (Indicating that there are some definite concerns about Dominion behavior versus public interests.) |
! Note !
This is a 'starter' page on which to collect
more info --- including web-site links and web-search links.
The plan is to add more info as it becomes available in future years.
Go to TABLE of CONTENTS
(Skip this Introduction)
|
Introduction : I have become increasingly concerned in the 2013-2016 time frame by the progress (lack of it) being made by the Dominion Resources utility company after it was awarded, by the federal government, exclusive rights to 112,800 acres off the Virginia coast for a wind turbine project. In mid-2013, eight companies were 'pre-qualified' to bid on the acreage in a September 2013 auction:
By 2015, it had become apparent to me that the auction process is flawed in that it awarded development rights to a single bidder --- in fact, to a bidder (Dominion Resources) that has so many interests in other types of energy generation (coal, natural gas, oil, nuclear) that Dominion was not (and is never) likely to give sufficient attention to the wind turbine project. In fact, there was at least one other bidder on the project that had a lot more experience in completing wind turbine projects --- on-shore and off-shore. It is safe to say that the competitors of Dominion would not have been distracted by a multitude of 'energy irons in various fires' --- AND those competitors would have been much more economically motivated to complete the project as soon as possible. In fact, Iberdrola is a Spanish energy company with extensive wind turbine development experience. Iberdrola had partnered with the Newport News (Virginia) Shipyard on the bid. But Iberdrola eventually pulled out when it became obvious that too many roadblocks were being erected in the process. (It was pretty apparent from news accounts of the leadup to the auction, that Dominion was trying to eliminate the competition by a variety of means --- at state and federal government levels.) It is apparent to me that the wind turbine development on that acreage should have been awarded to TWO bidders --- because COMPETITION is always going to be more stimulating to development than a MONOPOLISTIC approach. (The Department of Energy could have split the acreage in two and awarded the project to two bidders --- with some sort of cooperation - or separate - arrangement on the provision of power cabling from shore to the wind turbines. It is a sure bet that there would have been a lot of activity on the project if Dominion were competing against Iberdrola. Dominion would not like to be 'shown up' by that Spanish company.) There are many countries that have significant off-shore wind turbine installations (Denmark, Netherlands, Spain, Aruba). Tiny little Aruba has a wind turbine installation that was providing more than 20 percent of their power in 2013 --- and Aruba plans to increase their offshore wind turbine count by the year 2020 so that nearly 100 percent of their energy needs are provided by wind. (Aruba is favored by nearly constant winds.) If tiny Aruba can build so many offshore wind turbines, it is absolutely appalling that Dominion Resources cannot even get a relatively tiny two-wind-turbine demonstration project off the ground. For more information on these issues, here are some 'general web searches' on some companies and countries:
You can modify these keywords to do similar types of searches, for more information on the topics outlined above. Way to go, DOE! To me, it was encouraging to note that recently (circa 2016 May), the Department of Energy withdrew $40 million in funding, because Dominion could not gurantee it would have the turbines up and running by 2020. (Dominion is supposed to erect two wind turbines 24 miles off the coast of Virginia Beach that could generate 12 megawatts of electricity, enough to power about 3,000 homes.)
In my view, if Dominion cannot make some encouraging headway on this relatively small project by 2020, the project should be re-awarded --- to TWO bidders this time --- preferably bidders that have a high motivation to get the project off the ground --- bidders with a proven record in erecting wind turbines --- preferably bidders who have completed off-shore projects, as well as on-shore projects. Other issues with Dominion Besides the 'non-performance' on their exclusive wind-turbine bid award, there have been other 'public interest' issues arising with Dominion in the same time frame --- 2013 to 2016. It seems that almost every week (or, at least, every month), there is another 'news item' in which Dominion shows bad behavior --- that is, actions that are harmful to their fellow countrymen --- harmful to people's health and to their pocket books (via billing and via taxes wasted). And there are no signs that these 'items' will stop. Examples include
The purpose of this web page is to accumulate information on these kinds of 'Dominion behavior' issues. See the 'Table of Contents' below. Searching this page : The following 'Table of Contents' provides links to sections further down on this page. In case this does not provide a good way to find what you are looking for, then ... If you are looking for some particular information, you can use the text search function of your web browser. For example, if you are looking for information on a topic such as 'wind turbine', 'coal ash', or 'regulator', enter a key-string such as 'turb', 'coal ash', or 'regul' in the text search entry field of your web browser --- to find sentences on this web page containing the keyword(s). |
|
TABLE OF CONTENTS : (links to sections below on this web page) |
OFFSHORE-WIND-TURBINES PROJECT Info:
|
Quite a bit of information on the offshore wind-turbines project --- to which Dominion was awarded exclusive rights --- is above in the 'Introduction' section. I may periodically add further information on that project in this section of this web page. In a 2013jul23 newspaper article on the companies that were 'pre-qualified' to bid on the 112,800 acres offshore, the following sentence was seen: "Environmentalists applauded the long-awaited move toward clean energy but said they worry that if Dominion wins, the company might 'drag its feet' in fully developing the lease area." Given what has happened in 2013 to 2016 (after Dominion was awarded the project in September 2013), it seems that their 'worries' were justified. The same article included the following similar quotes expressing concerns about Dominion's future performance: "Beth Kemler, Virginia state director for the Chesapeake Climage Action Network, noted the 'lackadaisical time-table for offshore wind development that company officials have expressed in the past. We don't want the company to buy up the whole lease block and then sit on it for years and years." Glen Besa, director of the Virginia chapter of the Sierra Club "said Dominion has three natural gas plants at various stages of development and plans to add another reactor to its North Anna nuclear power station in Louisa County, and so it might decide it doesn't need offshore wind power." "So we're very concerned Dominion would bid on this project, be very slow to implement it because of other projects it's got and slow the development of offshore windin in Virginia" Besa said. It appears that their concerns were quite justified. AND it seems that federal and state agencies and politicians, as well as Dominion executives, ignored those concerns. For example: Virginia Governor Bob McDonnell and U.S. Secretary of the Interior Sally Jewell. And the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management of the Interior Department. And Dominion and its media spokesman at the time, Jim Norvelle. The same article included some information about the acreage: "The acreage is part of the U.S. Outer Continental Shelf located 23.5 nautical miles from Virginia Beach, and reportedly has the potential to generate enough turbine-generated electricity to supply about 700,000 homes. The area is being offered as a single block." "Virginia's 112,800 acres were selected after addressing concerns about sensitive ecological habitats, military training areas, ocean traffic, a dredge disposal site, and launches out of NASA's Wallops Flight Facility on the Eastern Shore." Renewables becoming cost-competitive in 2015-2016 One thing that is particularly irksome is that --- while Dominion is spending money on nuclear-expansion and coal-to-gas and power-cabling-unrelated-to-wind-turbines --- it was reported in newspapers, in 2016, that, for the first time, solar and wind projects accounted for an overwhelming majority of the new energy generation that came on-line in 2015 in the U.S. It is not surprising to me that solar and wind are rapidly becoming competitive with fossil-fuels for energy generation --- if only because offshore oil platforms are ridiculously expensive and offshore oil constitutes a major part of oil and gas production. Furthermore, oil and gas production has passed peaks in all nations, worldwide --- so rising costs are inevitable as the world population is expanding exponentially. Hence we see Saudi Arabia working on major alternative energy projects --- for example, with the U.S. General Electric company and other companies.
It is time for Dominion to start taking solar and wind seriously. These are rapidly becoming cost-effective --- AND they have nowhere near the pollution effects (acids in the air, etc.), storage costs (of 'clean' nuclear waste), and reclamation costs (coal ash ponds, etc.).
An additional benefit of renewables: If not offshore, start onshore. If it does prove that implementing offshore wind in Virginia is just too expensive at this time, then Dominion should start considering onshore wind projects. Note: At least, Dominion did take some core samples off the Virginia coast in 2014 July, for the wind turbine project. Judging by how the Dominion executives are still dragging their feet on the project, they do not feel confident about the ability to make the towers stand up to hurricanes. States like Iowa have integrated wind projects into the farms with the cooperation of farmers. And California has an iconic wind farm (forest) in the hills above the San Francisco bay. There is no clear reason why Virginia should not be doing the same --- in rural areas or in mountains of Virginia. There will be protests about bird strikes in wind turbines, but those kinds of situations can be mitigated. I have seen the California wind turbines. No apparent bird carcasses. Implementors in Iowa and California could be consulted. Besides, the replacement of coal-fired (and eventually gas-fired and nuclear) plants by wind turbines (and solar) will probably result in a net reduction in bird deaths due to energy generation facilities. (No acid rain. No ash. No nuclear effects - steamed or irradiated birds.) For further information on Dominion and wind projects, here are some web searches to try (and to modify).
|
COAL ASH Info :
|
On 2016 Jan 15, an Associated Press newspaper account (by Steve Tzkotak) titled 'Va. OKs dumping of coal ash wastewater' included sentences like the following: "Dominion Virginia Power won state approval Thursday to dump millions of gallons of treated coal ash wastewater from two power plants into the James and Potomac rivers on a daily basis." Opponents argued the so-called 'dewatering' will pollute the rivers with toxic metals. The State Water Control Board voted to approve permits to dump the waste. This affects the Possum Point Power Plant in northern Virginia. Dominion is closing coal ash impoundments at the plant, which stopped burning coal more than a decade ago. "The board also gave the thumbs up to Dominion's plan to discharge coal ash wastewater from its Bremo Power Station --- its oldest coal-fired plant --- in Fluvanna County. The plant switched to natural gas in 2014." "Capping the coal ash impoundments is expected to take four years." "Regional awareness of coal ash, its storage and disposal have been heightened wince a breach of a coal ash impoundment site in February 2014 caused a major spill on North Carolina's Dan River." "At a crowded hearing Thursday on the Possum Point 'dewatering', evironmental groups, fisheries representatives, a state senator, and others said the levels of arsenic and other metals allowed by the state are too high. They said the discharges into Quantico Creek and the Potomac would harm spawning striped bass and other marine life and further fould waters already deemed impaired." "The State Water Control Board approved the discharge plans on the recommendation of staff with the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality [DEQ]. "The James River Association also argued that the Dominion permit allows toxic metals into the river at elevated levels. The river protection group said the discharge of the wastewater would affect recreational activities downriver such as fishing and swimming ..." My comments: Coal ash disposal is a difficult issue, but it appears that Dominion is not taking sufficient measures to filter a major part of the metals from the water. This is one reason why I believe companies like coal mining companies and electric (and gas) utilities should be required to pay money into 'restoration, reclamation, and rehabilitation' funds --- to pay for cleanup when 'sh*t happens' --- such as bankruptcies of coal companies that were supposed to 'reclaim the land'. Some references: 2015jun27 article titled 'Dominion Virginia jumping gun on coal ash cleanup' Some web searches for further Dominion-coal-ash info:
|
LOW RANK (among Utility Companies) on RENEWABLES - Issues Info :
|
Around 2013, a report was compiled on renewable energy sales and energy efficiency of 32 of the biggest utilities in the U.S. According to the report, each of the top five ranked utilities (in efficiency and renewables) had renewable resources account for 16 to 21 percent of its retail electricity sales in 2012. Among the bottom five utilities, which included Dominion (at 30 out of 32 in the rankings), renewables accounted for less than 1 percent of each company's total power sales. (It may be that some of those top ranked utilities were not actually generating the 'renewable energy' themselves. They may have been purchasing it from other owners of the generation facilities. But that is better than continuing to 'squat' on fossil fuels, almost totally.) It is pretty clear that Dominion is falling far behind most other U.S. utilities in migrating toward renewables. In a newspaper article (link above) on this report, it was reported that Dominion Virginia spokesman Dan Genest answered, by email, in 2014, that the report did not take into account some of Dominion's projects, such as Dominion's receipt of "a $47 million grant to build a two-turbine, 12-megawatt wind turbine demonstration project off the coast of Virginia" and that the report did not point out that Dominion is "leading the effort to develop up to 2,000 megawatts of commercial offshore wind." As reported in the 'Offshore Wind Project section' above :
In the same article (link above), it was reported that: "Renewables accounted for nearly half of the country's new electric generating capacity in 2012, with solar energy the fastest-growing energy source." It is apparent that Dominion is far off the pace of gaining experience with renewables, compared to about 30 other U.S. utilities. --- There was a newspaper report, in November 2016, of Dominion issuing request for proposals for power purchase agrements from compnaies that could provide up to 20 megawatss in solar energy, requiring that the facilities must come online in 2016 or 2017. The 2016nov09 newspaper article was titled 'New zoning amendment allows large solar facilities'. This move by Dominion resulted in the Gloucester County Board of Supervisors (in southern Virginia) receiving inquiries on whether zoning ordinances there allow for large solar facilities. Pardon my cynicism, but I have to wonder if Dominion is just doing this because they have certain renewables goals that they have to reach --- and they have been procrastinating on solar, thus having to require the solar facilities be available within a year or two. The Gloucester Board of Supervisors amended a zoning ordinance to allow large-scale and utility-scale solar facilities in the county. The ordinance describes a 'large-scale' solar facility as having up to five acres of land and producing more than 25 kilowatts of electricity but not more than 999 kilowatts. A 'utility-scale' solar facility covers more than five acres of land and produces one megawatt or more of electrical power. It appears that Dominion may finally be encouraging some solar projects --- but is not keen on implementing their own solar facilities. This begs the question: When is Dominion going to commit to some utility-scale solar facilities --- to have a realimpact on energy supplies in Virginia. Dominion needs to act soon. They have procrastinated too long already. In the meantime, it looks like we will not see utility-scale solar facilities in Virginia until after 2020. I look at those parking lots around the Pentagon in Washington D.C. and think what a waste. They could put solar-panel roofs over those huge parking lots (and many elsewhere in the state) and be getting Virginia into the 21st century. Heck, I have seen more solar farms in Vermont --- an Vermont probably has nowhere near the solar energy generation potential of Virginia. --- Dominion spokespeople can, no doubt, come up with lot of verbiage about planned projects --- but planned projects do not megawatts make, in the not too distant future. It is apparent that current Dominion executives simply do not have any plans for impactful renewables projects beyond "vaporware" and "demonstration projects". Those Dominion executives are making Virginia look like a backwater --- in a changing energy-costs environment that is rapidly passing by these executives, who are too slow to adjust, as they are set in old ways. For more information on Dominion's activities with solar and wind energy, you can try web searches like the following.
|
POWER LINES across the James River - Issues Info :
|
In the 2015 time frame, Dominion has been seeking approval to build transmission towers across the James River --- From the Surry Power Station to a proposed switching station between JamesCity-Williamsburg and Fort Eustis. A 2015dec16 newspaper article titled 'Parks chief: Deny Dominion proposal' included the following statments: "Dominion want to build the lines to reinforce its Peninsula power grid, but the utility giant has met strong opposition from environmental and historic perservation groups." "National Parks Service Director Jonathan B. Jarvis has come out in opposition to Dominion Virginia Power's plan to run power lines across the James River, saying 'This nation has only one Jamestown.'" "Dominion says it need to build the lines to make sure more than 600,000 residents and workers on the Peninsula are able to have adequate power." (Dominion has expressed concerns about 'rolling blackouts'.) I find the latter statement by Dominion to be 'disingenuous' and a 'subterfuge' --- seeing as how Dominion has been dragging its feet for the past several years on wind and solar projects that would have the best (and long-term) effect of relieving power outages. The article makes several more statements pertaining to this issue: "Dominion's application for a federal permit ... to allow 17 in-water transmission towers from its Surry Power Station to a proposed switching station in Skiffes Creek."
|
VIRGINIA STATE REGULATORS of Dominion Resources - 'Cozy' Issues Info :
|
There are various issues in the area of seemingly 'cozy' relationships between regulators and Dominion Resources executives. One issue is an agreement reached between Dominion Resources and the Virginia SCC (State Corporation Commission), around 2015, that basically says the SCC will keep 'hands off' of Dominion Resources for a couple of years. (Link to go here.) Another issue is in the area of rate increases --- and the way 'overcharge' increases are rolled back. The following 2015dec02 letter-to-the-editor explains this issue fairly clearly. " The State Corporation Commission claims that Dominion Power overcharged its customers and owes them a refund of $19.8 million, which is to be redistributed over the course of six months. While I am grateful that someone is holding Dominion Virginia Power accountable for this overcharge, I find it appalling that SSC judges have invoked a law permitting Dominion to keep 30 percent of these ill-gotten gains. In the real world, an individual would be required to pay restitution in the full amount as well as interest fees and punitive damages." SCC "regulators have determined that it is better to protect this corporation" allowing it to "keep 30 percent of an overcharge, if the company is caught red-handed." "If Dominion executives disagree [with returning the full amount], then they can express that in the form of litigation, just as everyone else is expected to do." I would be willing to bet $100 that, if we look up that law permitting Dominion to keep 30 percent of the overcharge, most of the legislators who voted for that law were Republicans. This is the kind of 'fiscal conservatism' that Republicans believe in --- taxpayer subsidies ('entitlements') for corporations --- but not for the retired or the ill. For more information on the Virginia regulatory bodies that can interface with Dominion Resources and it subsidiaries, here are some web searches :
|
Gas PIPELINE - Issues Info :
|
In the 2015-2016 timeframe, there have been continual protests of a proposed natrual gass pipeline across Virginia. Some commentary on this pipeline issue may be placed here in the future. In the meantime, here is a gathering place for some web-links on the issue. Some references: 2015may13 web-post titled 'Virginia is for Dirty-Energy Lovers' And here is a gathering place for some web-searches on the issue:
|
|
Bottom of this
To return to a previously visited web page location, click on the
Back button of your web browser, a sufficient number of times.
OR, use the History-list option of your web browser.
< Go to Top of Page, above. >
|