Documents
The Challenge of Energy Policy in New England
April, 2006
by Carrie Conaway, The New England Public Policy Center at Federal Reserve Bank of Boston
Summary:
Renewable energy sources have disadvantages as well as advantages, however.
Although their costs have decreased in
recent years, many renewables are still more
costly than traditional sources. Some are also
available only intermittently; for example,
wind can be variable and hydroelectric is seasonal. And while many people are in favor of
renewables in principle, many are also
unhappy when faced with the prospect of a
windmill or a trash-burning power plant in
their neighborhood. These facilities face the
same siting and investment difficulties that
any electrical facility would, as the developers of a proposed wind farm off the coast of
Cape Cod have discovered in recent years.
Executive summary
The Challenge of Energy Policy in New England
New England needs a reliable supply of energy for its day-to-day functioning and its economic growth. The right mix of fuels and technologies must be in the right place at the right time, all the time. Because of the long lead times in building energy infrastructure, ensuring system reliability requires making decisions, investments, and policy today that will allow the region to meet expected demand many years from now, while at the same time buffering the region from the impact of unexpected short-term changes in energy markets. And this, in turn, requires both well-functioning markets and carefully crafted public policies.
Reliability is of particular concern to New England, for several reasons. First, the region is lacking in traditional indigenous sources of energy. This means the region’s energy sources come at higher cost because they must be transported farther to get here, and it can also leave the region vulnerable to interruptions in supply and price spikes in world markets. Second, some are concerned that the deregulated structure of the region’s wholesale and retail electricity markets may not be providing the right incentives for firms to invest in new generation capacity, which could threaten system reliability. Third, most agree that even if the right incentives were in place, it would still be difficult to find communities willing to host this new infrastructure because of the region’s fragmented local decision making and increasing community concerns about the safety, security, and economic impacts of these facilities.
New England’s state governments can and should take a more active role in ensuring system reliability. They can work to maintain the region’s fuel diversity by responding to the region’s dramatic growth in natural gas demand and by experimenting with incentives to promote renewable energy sources and new technologies. They can reduce demand through new energy pricing structures and energy efficiency programs. They can work with ISO New England and energy regulators to improve the incentives for investing in electrical generation. And they can smooth the process of siting new infrastructure so that community, regional, and national considerations are all given due
weight.
weight.
New England’s energy problems were not quickly created, and they will not be quickly resolved. But they cannot be ignored, for they are too important to the region’s future. Without the assurance of an energy system that can meet immediate demands along with long-term growth, the region puts its economic prosperity at risk.
NEPPC
April 2006
April 2006
New England Public Policy Center
Filed under
:
Energy Policy
:
Connecticut
:
Massachusetts
:
Maine
:
New Hampshire
:
Rhode Island
:
Vermont
| < prev | next > |
Note: this article may be subject to the Fair Use Notice.