Posted on September 30, 2010 in Concerns, Environment, Finance, Government by Matthew SekolNo Comments »

In 2009, PSE&G published a paper refuting the federal government’s need for a transmission superhighway.  Either they have lost their minds or they truly don’t believe this paper is relevant to the Susquehanna-Roseland Transmission Line, which again, was outlined as part of a larger transmission superhighway outlined in 2005 by the PJM.
 
You can read this glorious self-defeating paper here and judge for yourself it’s relevance.  
 
I can’t even sum this up – it’s basically a lot of what we’ve been saying for the past few years now.  Truly mind boggling.  Stay with it, the insanity truly begins on Page 4!
 
http://www.pseg.com/info/media/pdf/clean_energy_wp.pdf

Posted on June 26, 2008 in Community, Finance, PPL by Matthew Sekol1 Comment »

Bernie O’Hare has written an excellent article on his “Lehigh Valley Ramblings” blog. His reasons for PPL building the transmission line are spot on – they are even mentioned in PJM’s long term assessment of the line.

I highly recommend you check it out!

http://lehighvalleyramblings.blogspot.com/2008/06/big-coal-real-reason-why-ppl-wants.html

Posted on June 24, 2008 in Finance, Government, PPL by Matthew SekolNo Comments »

This isn’t just a fight for PA, but it’s a fight against a publicly traded corporation with real shareholders. This is the excerpt from the latest 10Q filing.

(PPL and PPL Electric)
In June 2007, PJM approved the construction of a new 130-mile, 500-kilovolt transmission line between the Susquehanna substation in Pennsylvania and the Roseland substation in New Jersey that has been identified as essential to long-term reliability of the mid-Atlantic electricity grid. PJM determined that the line is needed to prevent potential overloads that could occur in the next decade on several existing transmission lines in the interconnected PJM system. PJM has directed PPL Electric to construct the portion of the Susquehanna-Roseland line in Pennsylvania and has directed Public Service Electric & Gas Company (PSE&G) to construct the portion of the line in New Jersey by June 1, 2012. PPL Electric’s estimated share is between $300 million and $500 million. PPL Electric’s capital projections currently include approximately $320 million for the new transmission line, which will require certain regulatory approvals.
In December 2007, PPL Electric and PSE&G filed a joint petition for a declaratory order with the FERC requesting approval of transmission rate incentives for the Susquehanna-Roseland transmission line. The companies requested: (1) an additional 1.5% allowed rate of return on equity; (2) recognition of construction work in progress in rate base; (3) recovery of all costs if the project is cancelled; and (4) an additional 0.5% allowed rate of return on equity for membership in PJM. In April 2008, the FERC approved the filing and granted all of the requested incentives except that the allowed rate of return on equity was approved at 1.25%.

from:
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/317187/000092222408000035/ppl10q.htm

What are the real benefits to Option C? Option A and B address reliability issues and can help new generation points in PA reach PA customers according to the PJM. Option C seems to exist mostly to deliver electricity to New Jersey. What are the PPL profits on PSE&G using these lines over in perpetuity?