Energy Law & Policy eJournal最新文献

{"title":"Demand Response after EPSA v. FERC — Now FERC Can't Do It Alone","authors":"Justin Gundlach","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2498283","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2498283","url":null,"abstract":"Flipping on a light switch calls upon the electric grid for power, and the grid responds by supplying it—a supply response. A demand response reverses this relationship: the end-user changes her electricity usage in response to a price change or in return for compensation. Since the 1970s, state and federal regulatory authorities have slowly opened electricity markets’ doors to participation by demand- as well as supply-side resources. The resulting incremental growth in demand-side participation has shown that all manner of electricity end-users, ranging from large industrial facilities to individual residential consumers, will change their pattern of electricity consumption if doing so can save them money. Further, it is generally understood that such participation would not only reduce the volume of electricity generated and consumed but could also greatly reduce the aggregate cost of generating it. Nonetheless, the electricity sector’s business models and rate designs continue to ignore many potential demand-side participants.One form of demand-side participation, called economic demand response (DR), involves specifying a baseline for a particular end-user’s electricity consumption at a particular time, then providing compensation for a reduction in actual consumption below that baseline. Electricity system operators can often make use of such reductions in much the same way as additional generation resources—meaning that DR can substitute for turning on or even building power plants. In addition, DR is also cheaper than many forms of generation.Demand-side participation, which debuted in the 1970s, has since become more sophisticated and prevalent. Congress endorsed DR with the Energy Policy Act of 2005 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) pushed it forward in 2008 with Order No. 719 and again in 2011 with Order No. 745. That latter push encountered a major legal hurdle, however, because it entailed FERC arguably exceeding its jurisdiction under the Federal Power Act of 1935 (FPA). The FPA assigns FERC jurisdiction over interstate wholesale sales and transmission of electric energy, as well as services “affecting” rates within FERC’s jurisdiction. However, the FPA reserves to state jurisdiction the regulation of generation facilities, local distribution facilities, and “any other sale of electric energy”—that is, other than at wholesale—including retail sales. When the question of FERC’s jurisdiction to set compensation levels for DR purchased from retail market participants was put to the D.C. Circuit, two judges said that FERC Order No. 745 impermissibly crossed the FPA’s jurisdictional dividing line; the third judge disagreed. FERC was rebuffed after seeking a rehearing en banc to challenge the majority’s interpretation of the FPA. It remains to be seen whether a majority of FERC’s commissioners will decide to seek certiorari, whether the Supreme Court will hear the case, and what the Court will decide if it does—in short,","PeriodicalId":388507,"journal":{"name":"Energy Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"27 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-09-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"115580649","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The International Trading Regime and the Regulation of Trade in Energy Resources. Is Reform Necessary and is a New Energy Agreement within the WTO Framework the Way to Go?","authors":"Jenya Grigorova","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2496868","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2496868","url":null,"abstract":"Although the WTO does not address energy as a distinct sector, numerous suggestions have been made, so far essentially in scholarly writings, to adopt a sectoral agreement dealing with energy issues. This contribution argues that a new Energy Agreement (EA) within the WTO framework would raise more problems than it would offer solutions. If such an Agreement were to be added to the WTO framework, several fundamental choices would have to be made in advance, e.g. will this new EA be plurilateral or multilateral; what will the scope of its provisions be, etc.? It may be argued that the sectoral approach is not new in itself, as it has already been used on several occasions. However, a comparative teleological analysis of these agreements proves that the issues in these sectors are substantially different from those concerning trade in energy resources. The model of existing sectoral agreements is therefore hard to transpose to the energy sector. Even if new rules were to be designed and Members reached an agreement as to the scope ratione materiae and ratione personae of such an EA, its integration into the WTO framework would have to be carefully regulated. Given all these complexities, combined with the current difficulty in reaching consensus, proposals for an Energy Agreement may hit a dead end, at least for several years to come. However, there are less problematic alternatives, such as the addition of an Annex to the WTO Agreement, a Reference Paper, or the adoption of an Interpretation decision. Arguably, all these solutions offer only partial adjustment of the existing framework. Major adjustment efforts will however prove to be futile, as most of the existing provisions are already either adjusted to deal with energy issues or sufficiently flexible to allow for an interpretation that will take into consideration sectoral specificities.","PeriodicalId":388507,"journal":{"name":"Energy Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"13 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-09-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"125358287","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Energy Storage and Renewable Energy","authors":"Tunç Durmaz","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2460676","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2460676","url":null,"abstract":"I consider an economy with fossil fuel and renewable energy and energy storage, and search for the conditions that lead to welfare improvements when energy is stored. I then solve for the optimal decision rule and analyze the long-run tendencies of the economy-energy variables. The findings are threefold. First, energy storage is fostered by the convexity of the marginal utility (prudence), the marginal cost function for fossil fuel energy, and the degree of intermittency. Second, considering a low penetration of renewable energy to the power grid, energy storage is not welfare improving if the fossil fuel energy cost function is linear. Third, energy storage creates an added value to renewable energy investments when actively used. By showing the in uence that energy storage can have on energy generation and investment decisions, I hope that the current work can be in uential in a more generous treatment of energy supply in future energy-economy-climate models.","PeriodicalId":388507,"journal":{"name":"Energy Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"265 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"134246074","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Renewable Energy in the International Arena: Legal Aspects and Cooperation","authors":"M. Citelli, M. Barassi, Ksenia Belykh","doi":"10.21827/5a86a7c841628","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.21827/5a86a7c841628","url":null,"abstract":"This article aims at investigating the relevant aspects of international law and cooperation in the field of renewable energy. Part I provides an overview of the multiple soft law developments within and outside the UN framework as well as an assessment of a chosen set of extant treaty obligations either fostering or potentially constraining the development of the renewable energy sector. In light of these norms, Part II analyses a series of recent cases and international disputes triggered by non-environmental interests and rights allegedly impaired by the implementation of certain renewable energy-related plans and projects. In particular, this section considers the compatibility of renewable energy development with extant norms in the areas of human rights (ECHR), procedural environmental rights (Aarhus Convention) and international trade law (WTO). Despite the scarcity of binding norms on renewable energy generation and the persistence of various factors leading to disputes, global cooperation in the field of renewable energy is gaining momentum. Starting with an overview on CDM renewable energy projects under the Kyoto Protocol, Part III then shifts to the latest developments in renewable energy cooperation prompted respectively by the creation of the International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) and by the growing number of transnational private partnerships operating in the field of renewables.","PeriodicalId":388507,"journal":{"name":"Energy Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"29 17 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-05-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"114998756","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Gas Network and Market Diversity in the US, the EU and Australia: A Story of Network Access Rights","authors":"J. Glachant, M. Hallack, M. Vázquez","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2418931","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2418931","url":null,"abstract":"The institutional setting of open gas networks and markets is revealing considerably diverse and diverging roads taken by the US, the EU and Australia. We will show that this is explained by key choices made in the primary liberalization process. This primary liberalization is based on a definition of network access rights, which leads to different regimes for the transmission services, as well as for the gas commodity trade, as commodity trade depends on the network services to get any market deal actually implemented. Not only do those choices depend on the physical architecture of the network, but also the perceived difficulties and institutional costs of coordinating the actual transmission services through certain market arrangements.","PeriodicalId":388507,"journal":{"name":"Energy Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"11 1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"130675843","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Protection of Russian Investments in the EU Energy Market: Implications of Russia's Possible Re-Accession to the Energy Charter Treaty","authors":"Anatole Boute","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2410543","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2410543","url":null,"abstract":"This paper analyses the ECT from the perspective of the protection of Russian investments in downstream energy markets, in particular in the EU. Based on a primarily legal approach, this paper takes the Russian perspective and focuses on jurisdictional issues relating to the possibility for Russian investors to challenge EU and national energy law before independent arbitral tribunals. The objective of this analysis is to contribute to the debate on Russia’s potential re-accession to the ECT in the context of the modernization of the Energy Charter process and taking into account Russia’s draft Convention on Energy Security. More specifically, this paper aims to propose a critical analysis of the added value that re-acceding to the ECT would represent for the protection of Russian investors abroad.","PeriodicalId":388507,"journal":{"name":"Energy Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"21 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2014-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"116269039","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"The Fragmented Governance of the Global Energy Economy: A Legal-Institutional Analysis","authors":"R. Leal-Arcas, Andrew Filis","doi":"10.1093/JWELB/JWT011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1093/JWELB/JWT011","url":null,"abstract":"The objective of this article is to promote global energy security by evaluating the existing patchwork of institutions and processes linked to the governance of the global energy economy. What we mean by 'global energy security' is the satisfaction of humankind’s energy needs to maintain lifestyle levels in the developed world and to promote development and improve the quality of life across the world, including least-developed and developing countries.The article focuses on the global energy economy, its fragmented governance and its implications for global energy security. Inter-State governance over the global energy economy is neither global nor cohesive. Rather, the various aspects pertinent to it — among others, economic development, climate change, trade, investment protection, finance and human security — are managed in a disparate and disjointed manner. What is more, the absence of a global energy security regime to address 'global' — ie humankind’s collective — energy needs justifies the need to investigate the implications of the current state of play for global energy security.To do so, the article will examine all relevant institutions and processes linked to the global energy economy in order to assess their individual and combined implications for global energy security. This article therefore aims to promote an understanding of, and an attitude towards, the global energy economy that acknowledges that it is a composite affair with a high degree of interplay between its constituent parts, and that there are systemic reasons why the current state of play fails to address global energy security needs.The aim of the article is to perform an extensive mapping-out and analysis of the institutions and processes linked to the governance of the global energy economy, and of those purportedly concerned with global energy security, in order to answer the following three questions:1. How does the current governance system of the global energy economy affect global energy security?2. What challenges does the current global energy governance system pose to global energy security?3. Which models of global energy governance should be applied to promote and improve global energy governance generally and global energy security in particular?","PeriodicalId":388507,"journal":{"name":"Energy Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"12 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"122698972","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Drilling on Publicly Owned Land","authors":"Eugene E. Dice","doi":"10.2139/SSRN.2280519","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/SSRN.2280519","url":null,"abstract":"This article covers three recent court opinions dealing with drilling on state and federal land: two in Pennsylvania and one in California. In Minard Run Oil Co., v. U.S. Forest Service, a Third Circuit decision, private entities owned the subsurface rights, while the federal government owned and managed the surface rights. Belden & Blake v. DCNR, a PA Supreme Court decision, pitted the right of access by the owner of an oil and gas estate underlying a state park against the authority of a state agency to regulate and protect surface use. The article then contrasts those holdings with a recent California case, Center for Biological Diversity v. Bureau of Land Management, in which the government owned both the surface and the oil/gas in part of Central California’s Monterey Shale Formation.","PeriodicalId":388507,"journal":{"name":"Energy Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"41 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-06-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132494117","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Understanding Net Metering System as an Incentive to Promote Rooftop Solar Photovoltaics","authors":"Daisy Das","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2278034","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2278034","url":null,"abstract":"Rooftop Solar Photovoltaics (RTPV) is a suitable strategy for distributed generation of electricity while ensuring sustainability. Diffusion of such technology needs incentives and net metering works as a financial incentive towards proliferation of RTPV. It has been found from the discussion that net metering is a suitable strategy for an energy deficient country like india to ensure regular and uninterrupted supply of power without depending much on grid electricity.","PeriodicalId":388507,"journal":{"name":"Energy Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"1 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-06-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"129982235","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Energy Community and European Common Aviation Area: Two Tales of One Story","authors":"Michael Charokopos","doi":"10.54648/eerr2013017","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.54648/eerr2013017","url":null,"abstract":"The European Union (EU) conducts a multi-faceted policy in South-eastern Europe. Concentrating on two dimensions of the EU policy in the region, energy and aviation, the article considers the development of the two relevant regional initiatives, the Energy Community and the European Common Aviation Area. The first intends to create an integrated energy market in electricity and natural gas, by bringing together the twenty-seven EU Member States with nine partners from South-eastern Europe. The second is expected to create an integrated aviation market of thirty-six countries and five hundred million people, governed by the EU standards of aviation services' market, safety, security, Air Traffic Management and environment protection. While recognizing the existence of common features shared by the two initiatives, the analysis purports to identify the special characteristics of the two reform processes instigated by the EU, in order to highlight the existing differences and to shed light on the underlying explanatory factors. Emphasis is put on the relationship between the ideational foundation of the two reform processes and the material interests of the actors involved in them.","PeriodicalId":388507,"journal":{"name":"Energy Law & Policy eJournal","volume":"18 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2013-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"132257731","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}