►
From YouTube: The Electric Grid Revolution and the Clean Power Plan
Description
Despite the U.S. Supreme Court stay of EPA’s carbon regulations, states are considering a range of potential energy futures based on new technologies and dramatically lower prices for natural gas and renewables. Hear leading energy analysts discuss how states can harness these changes to spark innovation, drive job growth and modernize electric grids, and how it will impact the state economies, jobs and citizens.
A
Welcome
to
our
current
session
here,
the
electric
grid
revolution
and
the
clean
power
plan.
My
name
is
Glenn
Anderson
I
am
the
NCSL
energy
program
director
and
I'll
be
moderating
the
session.
So,
just
over
a
year
ago,
the
US
environmental
protection
agency
released
the
clean
power
plan,
which
is
the
first
carbon
dioxide
regulations,
the
nation's
first,
carbon
dioxide
regulations
for
electric
power
plants
and,
as
a
result,
it
provoked
29
states
and
agencies
to
file
suit,
basically
contesting
the
ability
of
the
EPA
to
create
and
implement
the
regulations.
A
A
So
the
session
will
begin
today
with
some
polling
to
familiarize
you
and
basically
assess
your
familiarity
with
the
clean
power
plan,
preceded
by
short
presentations
by
our
panelists.
We
will
then
have
some
additional
polling
and
a
moderated
discussion.
So
now
I'd
like
to
pass
it
over
to
my
colleague,
Jocelyn
turkey,
who
will
be
leading
the
polling
portion
of
this
session.
Thank
you.
B
Good
morning,
thank
you,
so
it's
Glenn
mentioned
today
will
be
participating
in
some
audience
polling.
You
may
have
done
this
in
another
session
at
legislative
summit.
So
our
first
question
here
is
a
bit
of
a
test
one.
So
everyone
can
join
the
poll
to
participate.
You
can
open
up,
bring
up
your
cell
phone
and
open
your
text
message:
application
in
the
recipient
line,
plz
txt
it
to
the
number
two
two
three
three
three
and
you're
going
to
include
in
the
body
of
the
text
message:
NCSL
eet.
B
It
doesn't
matter
if
it
is
or
isn't
capitalized
and
then
once
you
hit,
Send
you'll
receive
a
message
in
response,
letting
you
know
that
you
have
joined
the
pole
once
you
do
that,
you
can
begin
participating
in
this
question
right
here.
You'll
respond
with
the
letters
a
through
e
depending
on
your
guests.
So
thank
you
all
right.
We
have
the
first
person
the
just
responded,
so
the
question
is
which
of
the
following
was
not
invented
in
Chicago,
it's
a
the
zipper,
be
the
ferris
wheel,
see
the
twinkie
d,
the
baseball
or
e.
B
B
B
All
right,
still
tabulating,
where
approximately
oh,
it
looks
like
about
half
of
the
room,
says
that
they
have
a
moderate
understanding
of
the
clean
power
plan
and
a
little
bit
about
a
third.
So
they
have
a
high
understanding
all
right
and
then
the
next
question
is:
what
impact
do
you
think
the
clean
power
plan
will
have
on
the
economy?
A
for
positive,
be
for-,
see,
varies
depending
on
region
or
D.
No
impact.
B
Alright
looks
like
our
lead
answer
is
C
varies
depending
on
region
which
now
just
tied
up
with
positive,
both
at
forty
percent
and
then
for
the
final
question
in
this
sequence.
If
the
clean
power
plan
advances,
what
do
you
think
is
the
largest
or
biggest
challenge
to
implementation?
A
is
grid,
reliability,
B
is
creating
a
multi-state
market
for
carbon
credits.
C
is
preventing
rate
increases
and
d
is
addressing
job
and
economic
development
impacts.
B
Excellent,
so
it
looks
like
we
have
almost
pretty
similar
responses
here,
all
in
the
twenty
to
twenty
eight
percent
between
all
of
these.
So
that
is
our
final
question
for
this
series
of
polling
and
our
panelists
will
be
able
to
take
your
responses
into
consideration
and
their
opening
remarks,
and
then
we
will
have
an
opportunity
for
you
to
text
into
this
poll
again
after
they
speak
with
some
of
your
questions.
A
Alright,
thank
you
so
much
Jocelyn.
Our
first
presenter
is
Francisco
de
la
Chesney
from
the
electric
power
research
institute,
he's
a
senior
project
manager
in
the
Global
Climate
Change
Program.
He
has
both
domestic
and
international
climate
change
issues
included
in
his
research
portfolio
on
domestic
issues.
His
work
focuses
on
modeling
of
the
US
electric
power
sector
and
electric
and
energy
system
prior
to
joining
every
mr.
A
de
leche,
st
was
the
chief
climate
economist
at
the
US
Environmental
Protection
Agency
lead
author
for
the
Intergovernmental
Panel
on
Climate
change's,
fourth
assessment
report
and
served
as
the
US
government's
lead
technical
expert
on
long-term
economic
and
emission
scenarios.
So
let's
welcome
francisco
de
leche
S&E.
C
For
those
of
you
who,
like
legislative
details,
I
mean
in
general
as
sort
of
a
summary
take
is
this
is
EPA's
regulatory
attempt
to
read
co2
emissions
from
the
power
sector,
primarily
focusing
on
existing
power
plants.
What
you
see
here
is
a
trajectory
of
co2
emissions
from
the
power
sector
from
EPA's
regulatory
impact
analysis
that
came
out
when
they
were
promulgating.
The
rule
the
base
case
shows
increasing
emissions
of
co2
out
to
2030,
with
a
slight
decline
afterwards.
C
So
the
goal
of
the
regulation
is
to
reduce
those
emissions,
thirty-two
percent
below
2005
levels
by
2030
and
there's
a
couple
of
different
approaches
that
are
that
are
in
the
regulation.
There's
a
rate
base
in
am
a
space
I'll
get
to
those
in
a
second,
and
you
can
see
from
EPA's
analysis
that
you
know
the
full
implementation
of
either.
One
of
those
two
trajectories
would
get
you
down
to
their
target.
C
C
So
what's
going
to
happen
next
is
is
going
to
be
hearing
the
DC
Circuit
Court
in
September
to
the
challenges
to
the
to
the
regulation
and
then
whatever
comes
out
of
that,
will
most
likely
end
up
back
to
the
supreme
court
later
this
year
early
next
year.
We're
not
sure,
then
you
get
into
the
whole
uncertainty
as
to
what's
happening,
the
Supreme
Court.
C
Eventually
there
will
be
a
decision
from
the
Supreme,
Court
and
I
guess.
The
most
certain
thing
you
can
say
is
that
then
a
new
EPA
in
the
next
administration
will
be
the
one
that
will
have
to
address
whatever
decision
comes
out
of
the
Supreme
Court
going
sort
of
forward
from
2018
and
beyond,
and
you
can
all
think
about
the
different
uncertainties
as
to
who
might
be
running
EPA
at
that
point
in
time.
C
So
a
little
bit
of
uncertainty
going
forward,
which
is
not
the
best
thing
for
the
power
sector
in
terms
of
making
investment
decisions
and
so
on.
So
we
did
our
own
analysis.
We've
been
doing
analysis
and
the
clean
power
plan,
it's
being
a
large
part
of
our
research
portfolio.
For
the
last
say
three
years
ever
since
EPA
came
out
with
the
early
proposal
and
we
use
a
an
in-house
model
that
essentially
tracks
generation
investment
in
options
for
each
of
the
50
states
in
it,
and
it
also
tracks
the
interplay
of
renewables
integration.
Quite
well.
C
We've
been
fortunate
at
Emory
that
we've
been
working
with
over
20
utilities
in
specific
to
understand
a
lot
of
the
details
within
within
eight
states.
So
sorry
for
a
little
bit
of
the
screen
adjustment.
But
the
clean
power
plan
can
be
somewhat
complex
in
terms
of
the
implementation
options
that
each
state
has
at
its
disposal,
but
they
essentially
break
down
into
two
categories:
right,
there's
a
rate
approach,
a
state
can
take
or
there's
a
mass
approach,
the
rate
and
there's
sort
of
four
general
approaches
in
two
to
four:
a
two
from
ass.
C
The
key
thing
to
remember
is
you
know:
EPA
proposed
these
approaches,
but
really
left
it
up
to
the
state's
individually
to
determine
how
to
pick
an
implementation
pathway
for
compliance.
So
one
of
the
analysis
that
we
did
was
to
say
you
know
what,
if
what,
if
a
state
was
really
just
looking
at
its
own
generation,
its
own
investment,
you
know
the
power
system
just
within
that
state
and
didn't
want
to
try
to
get
into
all
the
complexities
of
what
am
I.
What
are
my
neighbors
doing?
C
How
much
could
I
trade
electricity
to
try
to
help
to
comply
with
this?
What
if
I
traded
emissions
credits
for
missions
rights,
because
you
can
understand
it-
gets
fairly
complex,
fairly
quickly
and
I?
Imagine
many
of
you
have
been
sort
of
already
been
thinking
about
this,
so
we
did
an
analysis
say
what,
if
it
was,
you
know
just
from
your
own
state's
perspective.
C
Are
the
states
where
the
rate
approach
was
the
least
cost
option
from
implementation
and
for
the
rate
states
that
the
values
are
denominated
in
terms
of
emission
reduction
credits
in
terms
of
dollars
megawatt
hour?
The
other
states,
the
states
that
are
in
brown
are
the
states
where
a
mass
approach
was
the
low-cost
option
and
those
are
in
terms
of
allowances,
/
dollars
per
metric
ton.
So
you
can
see
that
there's
quite
a
variation
across
the
country
in
terms
of
what
would
be
from
a
modeling
perspective.
C
If
a
state
wanted
to
only
implement
the
clean
power
plan
within
its
own
borders,
what
it
might
want
to
choose
again
from
a
little
cost
perspective,
and
but
this
is
what
the
with,
if
you
expect
that
the
price
of
natural
gas
is
going
to
have
a
low
trajectory,
say
you
know
below
four
dollars
going
forward
out
to
2030.
But
what?
If
the
price
of
natural
gas
changes
goes
up
because
of
increased
exports
of
LNG
or
other
factors
that
were
not
sure
about?
C
Well,
then
their
picture
changes
so
again
from
the
least
cost
perspective,
there's
more
state,
so
that
would
want
to
pick
a
rate
approach
from
implementation
and
I'll
just
sort
of
go
back
and
forth
between
the
two.
So
this
is,
you
know
low
price
of
natural
gas.
This
is
a
little
cost
perspective.
If
the
price
of
natural
gas
happens
to
be
higher,
then
say
five
dollars
going
forward,
then
it
changes.
So
the
price
of
natural
gas
is
one
of
those
really
important
key
variables.
C
That
would
have
important
determination
as
to
what
the
least
cost
approach
would
be
on
an
individual
state.
So
this
is
just
an
example
of
some
of
the
complexities
that
we've
picked
up
and
trying
to
evaluate
the
clean
power
plan
from
a
state
perspective
and
here's
some
of
the
other
key
takeaways
key
takeaways,
is
that
you
know
there's
also
the
market
to
take
into
consideration
what
your
neighbor
is
going
to
do.
Is
your
neighbor
going
to
go
on
a
rate
base
for
mass
based
approach?
A
Thank
you
so
much
Chris
and
our
next
speaker,
sorry,
mr.
dateless
Chesney.
Our
next
speaker
will
be
Christopher
van
natten
senior
vice
president
at
MJ,
bradley
and
associates
MJ
bradley
and
associates
provide
strategic
advice
on
air
pollution
regulations,
energy
policy,
business
strategy
and
climate
change
policy,
with
focus
on
electric
and
natural
gas
industries.
For
more
than
10
years,
Crispin
Anton
has
worked
with
the
Clean
Energy
Group,
a
coalition
of
electric
power
companies
committed
to
responsible
environmental
stewardship,
evaluating
and
responding
to
environmental
and
energy
policy
issues.
So
let's
welcome
Chris
Van.
D
So
I
was
going
to
share
a
bit
of
the
results
that
we've
seen
like
Francisco
we've
been
doing.
Modeling
of
the
clean
power
plan
using
a
different
computer
model
called
the
integrated
planning
model,
I
p.m.
which
is
used
widely
by
EPA,
in
preparing
their
regulatory
impact
assessments
and
by
industry.
For
our
modeling
assessment,
we
worked
with
a
number
of
utility
companies
to
arrive
at
both
the
scenarios
that
we
we
would
model
and
the
assumptions
that
we
used.
D
We
also
worked
with
the
natural
resources,
defense
council
and
the
utility
companies
to
arrive
at
our
our
scenarios
and
assumptions,
and
we
have
published
on
our
website
at
MJ,
Bradley
com
we've
published
reports
summarizing
these
these
model
runs
as
states
think
about
their
approach
to
the
clean
power
plan
and
I'll
just
say
at
the
outset.
We
really
did
two
rounds
of
of
modeling
one
initial
round
of
modeling
we
published
in
January,
and
then
we
published
another
round
of
modeling
in
in
June
and
and
even
within
that
short
period
of
time.
D
We've
seen
changes
occurring
within
the
sector
in
December
Congress
passed.
The
tax
credits
for
for
wind
and
solar
energy
expectations
for
the
cost
of
solar
energy
have
have
only
come
down.
So
it's
kind
of
a
constant
process
of
keeping
up
with
the
changes
and
the
trends
that
are
are
reshaping.
The
industry.
D
Before
I
look
forward
and
talk
about
the
modeling
that
we've
done,
I
wanted
to
set
the
stage
a
bit
with
a
review
of
the
changes
that
have
been
occurring
within
the
sector
over
the
past
10
to
15
years.
It
really
has
been
a
revolutionary
level
of
change
for
some.
You
know
very
quiet
revolution,
because
independent
system
operators
and
utility
companies
have
done
just
an
excellent
job
in
managing
this.
This
transition
that's
been
occurring
in
the
way
that
we
produce
and
deliver
electricity.
D
The
independent
system
operators
are
both
projecting
a
net
reduction
and
electricity
demand
due
to
energy
efficiency
investments
and
increased
distributed
solar.
So
a
net
net
reduction
in
in
projected
demand
we're
expecting
record
levels
of
natural
gas
consumption
this
year
exceeding
coal
generation.
So
the
energy
information
administration
is
projecting
that
natural
gas
will
account
for
thirty-four
percent
of
electricity
generation,
and
coal
will
account
for
thirty
percent,
whereas
historically
goal
has
accounted
for
more
than
more
than
fifty
percent
of
generation.
D
D
D
Those
are
not
absolute
levels
of
generations,
so
those
are
indexed
to
the
year
2000
to
highlight
the
the
trends
and
the
changes
over
time.
The
result
of
that
has
been
a
fifteen
percent
reduction
in
co2
emissions
from
from
the
industry.
As
a
result
of
these
trends,
plus
the
retrofit
of
pollution
control,
equipment
knocks
and
so2,
emissions
are
75
percent
and
eighty
percent
lower
than
they
were
in
two
thousand
and.
D
D
All
of
this
is
really
low.
Low
price
of
natural
gas
has
been
driving
a
lot
of
these
trends
that
low
demand
growth
for
electricity
that
I
mentioned,
and
when
you
combine
that
with
growth
in
renewable
energy
generation
and
natural
gas
generation,
we
see
more
competition
for
a
shrinking,
or
at
least
not
significantly
growing
a
slice
of
the
pie.
We
see
lower
emissions
and
lower
wholesale
power
prices
as
a
result
of
those
those
low
gas
prices.
D
D
We
varied
the
level
of
energy
efficiency,
assumed
that's
a
key
assumption
in
modeling
the
clean
power
plan
and
we
we
modeled
low
levels,
medium
levels
and
a
high
level
of
energy
efficiency,
the
more
energy
efficiency
you
assume,
you
see
a
moderating
effect
in
terms
of
the
allowance
prices.
I
should
mention
another
change
that
we
made
in
this
round
of
modeling
the
National
Renewable
Energy
Lab
updated
their
cost
assumptions
for
utility-scale
solar.
D
D
Generally,
you
see
about
a
eighteen
percent
reduction
in
coal
generation
relative
to
the
the
reference
case
scenario.
Gas
generation
is
similar
to
the
reference
case.
Without
the
clean
power
plan
we
see
more
nuclear
generation
and
more
nuclear
capacity
retained
within
the
system
when
the
price
of
carbon
is
is
higher
so
that
added
six
dollar
per
ton.
D
The
reason
for
that
is
the
really
the
the
driving
factor
for
the
development
of
additional
wind
and
solar
capacity
is
the
Congress's
decision
to
extend
the
production,
tax
credit
and
the
investment
tax
credit,
so
that
drives
really
before
the
clean
power
plan
even
gets
underway
in
22,
additional
wind
and
solar
capacity
added
to
the
system.
So,
overall
creating
a
lower
carbon
system
and
moderating
the
projected
allowance
prices,
so
I
will
stop
there
and
glad
to
take
any
questions.
All.
E
Thank
you
and
good
morning,
everyone,
so
I'm
gonna
keep
with
the
baseball
Fame
Francisco
that
you
started
and
bat
cleanup
today.
What
I
want
to
do
this
morning
is
provide
a
little
bit
of
a
regional
case,
study
and
focus
in
on
electric
grid,
reliability,
which
was
one
of
the
areas
of
concern
or
challenge
that
we
identified
in
the
polling
at
the
beginning
of
this
program,
so
providing
that
regional
perspective
I'll
start
out
by
explaining
what
my
so
is
and
what
it
does.
E
The
easiest
thing
to
start
out
with
is
to
say
what
we
don't
do
we
don't
own
any
electric
generation,
no
power
plants,
nor
do
we
own
any
electric
transmission.
What
we
do
instead
is
we
balance
the
demand
in
this
supply
across
a
large
region
of
the
country,
and
we
try
to
make
sure
that
we
are
doing
that
to
accomplish
two
purposes.
One
make
sure
that
there
is
electric
system,
reliability
and
two
to
make
sure
that
we
are
doing
that
as
efficiently
as
possible.
E
So
the
whole
idea
is
for
all
of
the
utilities
that
are
members
of
organizations
like
my,
so
it
collectively
brings
down
the
costs
that
are
associated
with
with
electric
production.
We
care
about
the
clean
power
plan
and
other
environmental
rules
not
based
on
the
policy
or
the
compliance
objectives,
but
much
more
focused
on
the
impacts
to
the
electric
system,
so
that
grid
reliability.
That
I
was
talking
about
this
day.
The
clean
power
plan
was
a
surprise
to
a
lot
of
people.
E
Most
of
us
didn't
see
that
coming,
and
you
know
we
asked
ourselves
the
question
of
well.
Does
this
stay
of
the
clean
power
plan
change
everything
we
were
embarking
on
an
intensive
modeling
effort
of
of
the
rule
herb?
Does
it
actually
really
not
change?
Much
at
all?
So
from
a
legal
and
political
standpoint,
the
uncertainty
associated
with
this
rule
was
not
lost
on
us
of
our
15
states.
E
E
Along
with
that
uncertainty,
though,
we've
been
focusing
an
awful
lot
on
the
other
changes
that
are
happening
to
the
electric
industry
right
now.
So,
regardless
of
whether
there
is
a
clean
power
plan
and
the
time
that
that
the
clean
power
plan
or
some
other
carbon
rule
may
come
into
into
play
from
a
national
standpoint,
we
already
know
that
we're
in
a
period
of
great
transition
for
the
electric
industry,
we
had
a
period
for
a
couple
of
decades
of
relative
stability
in
our
region.
E
What
we've
seen
now
is
a
lot
of
new
pressures
that
are
causing
the
system
to
change
quite
a
bit,
and
so
I'll
highlight
some
of
those,
because
I
think
that
that
ends
up
playing
into
how
we
think
about
they
impacts
potential
impacts
of
the
clean
power
plan
so
from
an
environmental
regulatory
standpoint,
I'm
going
to
focus
on
one
game,
changer
for
our
region,
and
that
was
the
mercury
and
air
toxic
standards.
I
mentioned
that
we
have
traditionally
had
quite
a
few
excess
generation
reserves.
E
The
mercury
and
air
toxic
standards
caused
a
significant
set
of
retirements,
especially
of
our
coal
fleet.
We
lost
about
12
gigawatts
of
coal
over
a
two
to
three
year
period
of
time
and
that
really
chewed
up
our
excess
reserves.
What
that
means
is
that,
when
you
have
hot
days
like
today
across
the
entire
region,
we
have
additional
challenges
with
balancing
that
high
demand
with
the
supply
that
we
have
in
the
transmission
that
we
have
across
the
region.
So
economics
is
another
big
factor
and
in
our
area,
natural
gas
is
a
great
one
to
focus
on.
E
As
we
see
those
cool
retirements
happen,
the
new
generation
that
is
coming
online
part
of
that
is
natural
gas.
One
interesting
story
that
I
saw
it
just
a
couple
of
months
ago
was
a
projection
that
nationally,
for
the
first
time
this
year,
there's
a
prediction
that
natural
gas
production
of
electricity
will
in
will
top
coal
production
of
electricity
for
the
first
time
since
we've
been
measuring
that
we're
certainly
seeing
an
uptick
of
gas
in
our
region.
Along
with
that,
we've
seen
a
huge
introduction
and
expansion
of
wind
energy.
E
We
get
a
good
part
of
the
Great
Plains
in
our
footprint,
but
especially
as
the
technology
improves
and
the
costs
are
coming
down
and
with
the
production
tax
credits
that
are
available,
that
that
growth
in
our
region
across
the
entire
region
has
been
fairly
strong.
So,
in
the
2007-2008
time
frame
we
had
less
than
a
gigawatt
of
of
wind
production.
We
had
about
500
megawatts
of
capacity
on
our
system.
We
asked
ourselves
at
the
time
and
we
went
through
regional
process
of
exploring
this
well.
E
How
much
can
we
add
to
our
system,
and
we
acknowledge
that
we
thought
we
could
add
a
lot,
but
we
really
didn't
know
well
fast
forward
to
2016.
We've
got
over
15
gigawatts
of
wind
capacity
on
our
system
and
in
the
next
10
years
by
2025.
We're
expecting
that's
going
to
be
up
to
about
25
gigawatts
of
wind.
That
is
a
big
change
to
the
system
and
it
is
a
very
different
kind
of
resource
than
a
base
load.
Coal
plant.
It's
intermittent.
It's
variable.
E
We
don't
know
quite
how
to
make
the
wind
blow
all
of
the
time.
So
you
know
that
that
changes,
how
we
are
able
to
operate
the
system,
so
those
evolving
technologies
in
those
policies
associated
with
with
the
changer
there.
So
the
clean
power
plan
focused
a
lot
of
people's
time
and
attention
when
it
first
came
out
and
it
really
ended
up
being
a
catalyst
for
thinking
through
this
change
that
the
industry
is
going
through
and
still
could
be
a
very
important
factor.
E
But
what
we
know
is
that
that
change
is
happening
and
a
lot
of
it
as
a
matter
of
how
fast
it
happens
and
the
extent
to
which
that
that
change
happens.
This
I've
been
talking
about
the
my
soul
region.
If
you
look
at
the
map
that
blue
area
shows
you
that
that
area
of
coverage
that
my
organization
has
there
are
a
lot
of
other
organizations
in
the
country
like
this,
and
in
some
places
there
are
large
integrated
utilities
that
provide
the
same
services.
E
So
I'm
going
to
just
T
up
a
little
bit
about
modeling,
because
I
think
our
discussion
is
going
to
maybe
get
into
this
a
little
bit
more.
Like
many
organizations
we
have
done
modeling
of
our
region.
We
do
that,
for
the
benefit
of
our
state
policymakers,
to
provide
them
with
an
additional
source
of
information,
as
they
assess
all
of
their
potential
compliance
options.
E
We
also
do
it
so
that
we
have
a
good
understanding
of
what
our
system
as
a
whole
could
look
like
under
a
variety
of
scenarios
that
could
come
about
through
clean
power
plan
compliance
we
in
our
modeling
focus,
not
surprisingly
on
the
impacts
to
the
production
of
electricity,
and
so
one
of
the
things
I.
Think
we'll
talk
about
here
in
a
couple
of
minutes
is
the
different
types
of
modeling
and
purposes
of
modeling
and
how
you
can
take
a
look
at
those
and
try
to
figure
out
what
they
all
collectively
mean
for
compliance
decisions.
E
So
you
know
high
level
some
of
our
results
for
our
region.
It
looks
like
if
States
band,
together
from
a
compliance
standpoint
that
ends
up
collectively
being
less
costly
than
a
state-by-state
compliance
approach.
Our
rate
damask
comparison.
A
lot
of
this
depends
on
how
the
resource
fleet
changes
in
a
state
over
a
period
of
time.
So
we'll
talk
a
little
bit
more
about
that
during
during
our
moderated
discussion.
But
the
last
one
that
I
want
to
focus
on
is
a
recognition
of
the
need
for
new
investment
in
an
infrastructure.
E
A
lot
of
these
things
require
quite
a
bit
of
time
and
advance
planning
to
put
them
in
place,
and
we
focus
on
that
because,
of
course,
to
the
extent
that
infrastructure
is
necessary
to
maintain
reliability,
we
want
to
make
sure
that
folks
are
doing
that
advance
planning
and
have
that
knowledge
with
that
I'm
going
to
stop
them,
we
can
get
into
our
discussion
now.
Thank
you
all.
A
Right,
thank
you
to
all
of
our
speakers.
We
will
now
proceed
with
the
quick
moderated
discussion
here
and
to
kick
it
off
like
to
pose
a
question
to
our
presenters
and
we
can
start
with
Francisco.
What
would
you
say
the
main
policymaker
take
days,
our
main
takeaways
for
policy
makers
of
your
organization's
research.
C
So
I
guess
I'd
break
those
down
into
sort
of
two
two
categories.
What
would
be
sort
of
the
analytical
take
away
and
the
other
one
would
be
sort
of
more
the
policy
take
away.
So
the
analytical
take
away
is
the
one
I
mentioned,
which
was
in
all
of
our
analysis.
We
find
that
the
the
price
of
natural
gas
actually
has
a
very
important
impact
on
the
potential
future
generation
and
then
therefore,
the
potential
co2
emissions,
much
more
than
the
actual
rate
or
mass
limits
that
EPA
is
trying
to
impose
under
the
clean
power
plant.
C
The
other
one
has
to
do
with
a
lot
of
the
uncertainty.
That's
inherent
in.
What's
going
on
as
I
talked
about,
states
have
different
options
for
implementation
for
compliance,
there's
a
rate
approach
as
a
mass
approach,
but
states
can
come
up
with
a
different
approach.
You
know
what
they
have
to
demonstrate
is
compliance
with
what
EPA
set
the
approach
they
take.
C
It
can
be
very
creative
to
the
states,
you
know:
does
a
state
get
into
trading
or
not
trading,
and
so
there's
a
lot
of
uncertainty
as
to
what
approach
a
state's
going
to
do
in
the
future
and
from
the
power
ceteris
perspective
that
continual
uncertainty
as
to
what's
going
to
happen
in
the
future
sort
of
gets
in
the
way
of
making
investment
decisions
for
your
system,
and
so
the
longer
this
uncertainty
continues.
That
just
is
another
challenge
that
many
of
the
utilities
across
the
countries
are
going
to
have
to
deal
with.
D
I
think
I
would
emphasize
the
importance
of
trading
and,
to
the
extent
that
states
can
adopt
consistent
approaches
to
the
clean
power
plant
that
will
facilitate
trading
of
allowances
or
credits
for
compliance
and
and
its
key.
Because
of
the
economics.
The
economics
are
better.
We
can
achieve
more
at
lower
costs
by
allowing
that
that
trading
across
across
state
lines.
D
D
The
I
should
have
emphasized
with
the
scenarios
that
we
were
modeling.
We
were
assuming
nationwide
trading
of
allowances.
I
think
Francisco
was
showing
an
island
type
of
scenario
where
each
state
was
individually
complying
and
I
think
you
were
focused
on
a
regional
approach,
but
to
the
extent
that
we
can
extend
that
and
adopt
a
trading
approach,
the
lower
the
cost
will
be
and
the
better
it
will
be
for
the
for
the
system.
E
So
I'll
just
add
to
that,
because
a
very
good
comments
and
things
that
that
were
on
my
mind,
this
clean
power
plan
rule
possibly
more
than
any
other
environmental
rule,
has
such
a
broad
set
of
implications.
Far
outside
of
the
environmental
compliance
realm.
We've
talked
about
impacts
to
the
electric
system.
E
There
are
a
set
of
broader
impact
to
the
end
of
energy
industry
as
a
whole,
and
so
along
with
that
quite
a
bit
of
economic
issues,
whether
it's
you
know
dealing
with
with
with
the
costs
associated
with
the
compliance
to
dealing
with
job
impacts-
and
you
know
other
sorts
of
considerations
that
that
would
will
come
along
with
this
I
think
that
the
interesting
part
of
this
for
policymakers
is,
you
know,
thinking
through
all
of
those
factors
together
and
trying
to
come
up
with.
You
know
some
sound
policy
decisions
with
that
long-term
view.
E
Making
those
decisions
in
the
face
of
uncertainty
is
very
difficult,
but
the
one
thing
that
we
do
know
is
that
you
know
things
are
changing
right
now.
So
how
do
you
grab
a
hold
of
those
and
and
try
to
make
some
decisions
now
with
a
view
towards,
even
though
we
don't
know
exactly
what
the
future
holds?
What
can
we
do
that
we'll
have
the
least
regrets,
regardless
of
what
what
what
options
are?
You
know
what
things
face
us
into
the
future
great.
C
So
one
of
those
I
really
tried
to
emphasize
emphasized
was
that
there
is.
There
is
not
a
uniform
answer
to
all
the
states.
Each
state
needs
to
evaluate
the
clean
power
plan
and
the
different
options
you
know,
I
I
only
showed
results
for
two
Chris.
You
had
I,
don't
remember
how
many
scenarios,
but
yes,
it's
complicated,
but
you
got
to
do
the
math.
You
know
you,
you
know
the
state
aid,
the
appropriate
state
agencies,
you
know,
need
to
sit
down
with.
C
You
know
different
modeling
teams
either
in
the
state
or
you
know,
whoever
they
choose
to
work
and
you've
got
to
work
through
at
least
there's
this
four
main
different
scenarios
that
EPA
lays
out
some
states
have
heard,
or
even
considering,
maybe
using
a
carbon
tax
and
then
doing
something
with
revenue.
Because
again
the
important
point
is
at
this
particular
statute:
Clean
Air,
Act,
section
111
d:
the
states
are
the
ones
that
come
up
with
a
compliance
approach
now
EPA
lays
out
the
target
and
suggests
different
options
and
that's
what
they
did
under
the
federal
plan.
C
But
it's
really
on
the
state's
themselves
to
figure
out
the
best
compliance
and
so
you've
got
to
look
at
the
four
main
pathways.
Maybe
state
has
another
one
or
two
and
adjust
the
key
assumptions,
and
we've
talked
about
the
importance
of
the
future
price
of
natural
gas.
We've
talked
about
the
importance
of
regional
trading,
bloc's,
like
my
so
or
pjm
or
other
parts
of
the
country
you
kind
of
have
to
go
through
that
to
then
be
able
to
make
an
informed
decision.
D
So
right
in
mass
yeah
I
agree,
there's
kind
of
there's
pros
and
cons
to
each
and
it
depends
on
on
the
individual
state
situation.
I
think
they're.
There
are
some
states
like
those
that
that
are
constructing
new
nuclear,
where
a
hundred
percent
of
those
megawatt
hours
will
be
generating
credits
and,
and
so
in
that
situation
a
rate
based
approach
may
look
attractive.
D
But
I
see
a
number
of
advantages
to
a
mass
based
system.
It's
it's
one
that
the
electric
sector
has
years
of
experience
with
in
addressing
so2
and
NOx
emissions
and
even
co2
emissions
and
in
the
Northeast,
and
it's
been
a
successful
track
record.
I
would
say
in
using
that
that
mass
based
approach,
it's
somewhat
easier
in
terms
of
implementation,
you
track
emissions
and
you
surrender
allowances
based
on
those
reported
emissions
under
a
rate
based
system,
you're,
you're,
tracking
energy
efficiency.
E
D
Putting
on
my
economists,
hat
I
think
having
a
positive
carbon
price
works
well
from
a
market
perspective
versus
a
rate
based
crediting
system
where
there's
both
positive
and
negative,
crediting
and
and
debiting,
depending
on
the
type
of
generating
facility
and
I,
think
something
else
that
doesn't
get
talked
about.
A
lot
is
the
the
distributional
consequences
of
the
different
options.
D
So,
under
a
rate
based
system,
those
credits
are
being
issued
to
certain
qualifying
generating
units,
and
so
that
has
one
set
of
distributional
implications
under
a
mass
based
system.
There's
there's
different
options
about
how
allowances
are
distributed
and
existing
programs
have
done
it
in
in
different
ways,
and
those
choices
have
distributional
implications
in
terms
of
who
bears
the
the
benefits
and
costs
of
the
program
and
I
think
that's
that's
a
factor
for
for
states
to
consider
as
they
think
about
the
adoption.
I'm.
E
Going
to
see
if
this
one
works,
I
think
it
does
so
as
we
started
talking
with
our
state's
and
utilities
and
continue
to
talk
with
them
about
our
modeling
design
and
approach
and
our
modeling
results
and
especially
focused
around
those
areas
of
those
critical
decision
points,
rate
versus
mass
or
those
critical
concerns.
You
know
overall
cost
of
compliance.
E
One
of
the
things
that
we've
tried
to
do
is
make
sure
that
we're
doing
some
foundational
explanation
about
what
what
modeling
is
and
what
it
isn't
so
maybe
I'll
share
some
of
that
with
a
group.
First
of
all,
modeling
results
are
not
what
my
son
would
call
true
facts,
they're,
really
just
a
set
of
assumptions
that
you
can
use
to
test
different
compliance
approaches
and
provide
some
different
book
ends
to
really
help
with
making
some
assessment
about.
E
You
know
what
what
approach
or
you
think
might
work
out
best
in
a
in
a
state
or
a
particular
region,
so
they're
not
recommendation
so
much
as
a
source
of
information
to
factor
into
a
whole,
broader
context
of
issues
that
we
know
that
states
are
going
to
be
grappling
with.
You
know
those
those
economic
issues,
and
you
know
energy
issues
that
come
about
as
a
result
of
this
this
rule.
E
So
then
you
start
to
ask
yourself:
well
what
do
we
think
the
future
is
going
to
look
like
how
much
additional
renewable
energy
production
do?
We
think
that
our
state
and
the
region
as
a
whole
is
going
to
end
up
with
what
do
we
think
the
future
of
natural
gas
prices
are
going
to
be
over
a
long?
You
know
over
a
long
period
of
time
those
sorts
of
considerations
end
up
having
to
really
be
applied
in
looking
at
any
modeling
results.
A
E
A
C
So
I'll
start
with
the
second
part
of
that,
so
the
results
that
we
showed
to
took
into
account
the
renewable
portfolio
standards
that
you
know
sort
of
our
announced
they're
in
place.
They
also
took
into
account
the
extension
of
the
production,
tax,
credit
and
sort
of.
As
far
as
you
know,
we
knew
both
the
announced
retirement,
but
it's
a
it's
a
it's
a
results,
model
sort
of
looks
ahead,
so
it
sort
of
says
you
know
to
to
implement
the
clean
power
plan,
either
mass
or
rate
for
each
state.
C
What
mix
of
generation
would
would
meet
that
low
cost
tation.
So
to
your
question
night,
it
goes
back
to
you
know:
what
can
it?
What
kind
of
states
due
to
its
you
know,
lower
the
cost?
Well,
howdy.
First,
you
have
to
understand
how
you
define
costs
so,
while
estate
may
put
in
energy
efficiency
measures,
for
example,
or
might
change
or
put
in
place
renewable
portfolio
standards,
those
two
things
are
going
to
have
an
impact
on
the
cost
of
the
compliance,
the
clean
power
plan.
C
But
then
it's
it's
not
like
the
cost
goes
away.
Households
at
the
end
of
the
day
bear
the
cost
of
any
policy
implementation
or
any
changes
in
pricing
or
tax
structures
or
whatever
you
a
state
may
want
to
do
so.
While
there's
going
to
be
a
change,
let's
say
in
the
price
of
electricity
that
households
face.
You
also
have
to
take
into
account
other
potential
costs
at
households,
phase
to
get
a
picture
of
the
full
cost
of
implementation
and
also
across
the
state,
and
you
know
other
different
policies
that
may
be
used
from
for
implementation.
D
We
too
modeled
all
of
those
state
policies,
the
renewable
portfolio
standards
and
then,
as
I
mentioned,
we
assumed
varying
levels
of
energy
efficiency
as
well,
for
there
are
states
that
have
energy
efficiency
standards
and
utility
savings
goals
and
so
on,
and
we
did
see
just
to
focus
in
on
energy
efficiency.
The
effect
of
that
which
we
saw
was
to
moderate
the
the
price
of
allowances.
D
So
we
saw
higher
levels
of
energy
efficiency
moderate
the
allowance
prices
they
moderate,
essentially
the
demand
for
the
allowances
as
emissions
are
reduced,
and
then
we
saw
a
moderating
effect
on
the
monthly
electric
bill
impacts
when
we
estimated
those
with
with
higher
levels
of
energy
efficiency,
average
household
consumption
goes
down.
So
even
if
there's
an
impact
on
wholesale
prices
with
less
consumption
each
month
with
those
energy
efficiency
measures,
we
saw
a
moderating
effect
as
a
result
of
it.
E
So
I
think
that
policy
decisions
at
the
state
level
are
going
to
have
a
huge
bearing
on
how
states
assess
their
compliance
options.
I'll
give
a
couple
of
different
examples
here.
One
could
be
a
desire
to
really
maximize
the
investment
in
new
renewables
or
energy
efficiency.
If
a
state
policy
is
to
do
that
for
a
variety
of
factors
that
may
be
far
beyond
compliance
with
with
an
environmental
rule
that
that
will
certainly
factor
into
how
different
compliance
scenarios
end
up.
E
Looking
for
for
that
particular
state
on
the
other
end
and
I'm
picking
this
one,
because
I
think
it's
something
that
we've
heard
of
interest
from
several
of
our
states
is
a
potential
desire
to
retain
the
existing
energy
assets
or
electricity
assets
that
you
have
in
your
States,
whether
that's
for
jobs
or
you
have
a
local
fuel
source
available
to
you,
or
just
simply
a
notion
of
wanting
to
maintain
that
local
local
control
of
having
those
in-state
generation
assets.
That
is
a
completely
different
kind
of
policy
objective
that,
once
again,
those
compliance
options
will
look
differently.
A
A
So
what
would
you
say
is
the
biggest
challenge
for
States,
as
they
are
looking
to
craft
a
compliance
plan
and
keeping
in
mind
that
our
audiences
state
legislators
and
what
what
might
be
their
biggest
role
and
biggest
challenge
as
they
are
trying
to
help
their
states
meet
this
plan?
If,
if,
in
fact,
it
does
pass
muster
the
Supreme
Court.
E
So
I'll
share
with
you
what
we're
hearing
from
from
a
lot
of
our
states
right
now
and
also
when
I,
you
know,
when
I
go
to
different
meetings
and
conferences,
what
I'm
hearing
fairly
universally
from
from
state
level,
folks,
whether
it's
the
environmental
agencies
or
that
public
utility
commissions.
Sometimes
we
get
the
opportunity
to
talk
to
state
legislators
and
governors
offices
as
well.
Initially,
the
biggest
challenge
is
to
really
try
to
come
to
terms
with
all
of
the
complicated
issues
and
choices
that
that
are
associated
with
this
particular
rule.
E
And
you
know
what
we
hear
most
often
is
we
don't
know
where
to
start
with
this,
it's
almost
a
paralysis.
Kind
of
you
know,
kind
of
feeling,
I
think
that
we're
we're
starting
to
get
a
little
bit
past.
That-
and
maybe
some
of
that
is
because
that
this
day
has
you
know
at
least
taken
that
the
near-term
timelines
deadlines
off
of
the
table.
E
But
this
is
a
really
complicated
rule
with
with
a
lot
of
subsets
of
decision
so
trying
to
cut
through
that
and
I
think
what
we've
talked
about
in
terms
of
thinking
through
what
the
broader
policy
objectives
that
you're
trying
to
accomplish
for
your
state.
That
is
one
you
know
very
you
know,
I,
think
appropriate
and
wise
way
to
maybe
cut
through
some
of
the
noise
that
that
could
otherwise
be
associated
with
this
rule.
D
You
know
I'd
say
from
my
experience
in
talking
to
States.
It's
been,
the
challenges
is,
what
is,
is
the
process
for
coming
to
consensus
on
these
difficult
decisions,
because
really
I
alluded
to
the
distributional
implications
of
these
different
choices?
They
impact
different
players
differently,
so
there
will
be
arranged
a
range
of
views
depending
on
on
where
a
company
stands
different
implications
for
consumers
and
so
coming
to
a
consensus
is
will
be
a
challenge.
C
Just
add
one
of
the
things
that
we've
heard
and
working
with
our
member
utilities
and
working
with
some
of
the
state
agencies-
and
I
would
say
particularly
from
a
legislative
perspective-
is
that
if
a
state
wants
to
try
and
do
a
regional
training
approach,
is
one
state
going
to
have
to
implement
new
laws
to
enable
the
to
enable
that?
And
if
it
has
to
do
that
in
coordination
with
another
state?
How
do
you
get
all
the
legislative
processes
and
procedures
to
line
up
it
can
I?
C
A
So
we'll
jump
to
a
few
of
the
audience
comments
here.
I
think
this
regional,
this
regional
question,
has
been
on
the
minds
of
a
lot
of
folks
and
the
varying
potential
costs
between
regions.
How
do
you
feel
that
or
how
do
you
think
this
will
play
out
across
the
regions
and
now
those
those
costs
might
differ
based
on
basically
the
policies
and
the
the
resource
mix
of
the
region
as
they
go
into
this.
E
D
I
do
it,
it
certainly
will
vary
from
region
to
region.
There
are
you
know,
they're.
There
are
regions,
states
that
have
more
co2
to
reduce.
You
see
that
in
in
the
modeling,
when
you
model
states
individually
seeking
to
comply
with
their
their
targets,
using
a
range
of
allowance
prices
from
state
to
state
anywhere
from
zero,
so
the
Northeast
states
have
all
committed
to
in
2020
their
existing
program.
Has
them
capped
below
the
EPA
2030
goal?
So
they
they
are.
C
Pretty
much
is
consistent,
no
first
states
that
have
traditionally
been
relying
more
on
coal
based
generation.
You
know
that's
going
to
be
more
of
a
challenge:
states
that
have
access
to
lower-cost
renewables,
wind,
in
particular,
maybe
solar,
depending
on
your
part
of
the
country,
that's
going
to
offer
a
lower
cost
option
for
implementation.
C
Chris
mentioned
the
states,
particularly
in
the
southeast,
that
have
made
the
investment
already
made
the
investment
on
nuclear
power,
in
that
you
know,
right
turn
out
to
be
a
good
investment
from
the
perspective
of
compliance
costs.
Although
nuclear
power
is
facing
challenges
in
other
parts
of
the
country,
so
you
know
you
have
to
look
at
you
know
your
your
regional
mix
of
generation
and
the
but
yeah
your
price
will
vary
depending
on
where
you
sit
and
what
your
generation
makes
looks
like.
I.
E
That's
a
tough
question
and
I
think
that
that
every
state
is
probably
going
to
have
a
you
know
different
perspective
on
what
they
think
is
the
the
best
use
of
resources
for
this
period
of
time.
The
the
one
thing
maybe
I'll
offer
is
I
mentioned
earlier
that
12
of
our
15
states
are
challenging
the
rule
several
of
those
states.
Most
of
those
states
have
stopped
their
official.
You
know
stakeholder
processes
and
work
on
developing
compliance
plans,
but
we
do
still
hear
that
there
are
certain
areas
that
they
think
you
know.
E
We
can
still
spend
some
time
thinking
this
these
issues
through.
Maybe
we
don't
need
to
focus
so
much
on
the
specifics
of
the
clean
power
plan,
but
we
know
that
things
are
changing
in
this
electric
industry
anyway,
and
maybe
we
should
continue
to
think
through
things
like
long-term
infrastructure
needs.
You
know
whether
it's
transmission
planning,
which
is
a
process
that
we
work
with
our
state's
and
utilities
on
or
thinking
through
other
reliability
kinds
of
impacts
associated
with
it.
D
I,
don't
have
a
lot
to
add
to
that,
but
I
do
to
varying
degrees.
I
do
see
states
continuing
to
plan.
There
is
plenty
of
material
here
to
think
through
and
analyze
and,
as
I
see
a
real
advantage
in
terms
of
continuing
to
think
through
these
these
options
that
are
available
to
States
and
and
how
they
plan
to
implement
the
rule.
I.
A
D
Cip
is
the
clean
energy
investment
program
which
was
intended
to
going
back
to
the
history
of
the
role.
There
was
the
start
date
for
the
role
in
the
proposal
was
actually
earlier
than
it
was
in
the
final,
so
EPA
made
kind
of
two
changes.
They
push
back
the
start
date
of
the
program
to
20
22,
and
then
they
added
this
clean
energy
incentive
program
which
is
intended
to
encourage
early
actions
in
terms
of
renewables
and
energy
efficiency
and
an
opportunity
to
earn
credit
for
those
efforts
before
the
program
gets
gets
underway
for
our
modeling.
D
We
actually
didn't
assume
any
of
those
early
incentive
credits
were
available,
but
those
you
know
would
would
provide
additional
allowances
or
additional
erc
credits
to
the
system,
which
would
allow
just
more
of
a
glide
path
towards
towards
compliance
and
so
I
think
you
know.
Timing
is
everything
with
this
type
of
transitional
effort
and
providing
adequate
time
for
capital
investment
decisions
and
infrastructure
to
be
built
is,
is
important,
so
I
think
having
the
opportunity
to
to
take
early
actions
and
to
earn
credit
for
those
actions
would
be
a
healthy
endeavor.