GF Energy Downloads
A number of GF reports, analyses, white papers, etc. are available for download. To access the downloads, please provide your name and email address and you will be taken to our download page.
Currently available downloads (in addition to the Electricity Outlook) include:
Who will build new power plants? Utilities or Independents (2005)
Sure, it could be the IPPs (or competitive power suppliers as they like to be called now): they have the know-how and should have more capital as the US power sector recovers. However, utilities are also flexing their muscles and want to build too… Thus, it is not obvious that IPPs can expect another big wave of new project development very soon. And then, there is the issue of debt-equivalency that penalizes long-term power purchase contracts with IPPs. From materials presented at the 2005 Platts Global Power Conference and published in World Generation
New US Baseload Capacity Trends (December 2005)
How much baseload is needed and which type of baseload capacity will be built and by whom? The results of a brand new forecast through 2025, with a comparison to the most recent 2006 EIA forecast. The analysis highlights the challenges and risks of building new baseload capacity.
“Electric Utility Resource Planning: The Role of Competitive Procurement and Debt Equivalency”, prepared for the Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA) (July 2005)
The purpose of this report is to analyze the role that competitive power has in utility resource planning and procurement, and in utility supply portfolios. There are a number of key issues that must be addressed, including:
- How to manage the debt equivalency issue, which arises when rating agencies impute debt to PPAs, thereby assigning a higher debt-to-equity ratio for comparative rating purposes (the consequence could be a derating and/or higher interest expenses) against the rate-based, utility self-build option.
- How to assure that all future power generation, both from PPAs and from the utility’s rate base, is treated comparably from a debt-equity basis and for evaluative purposes in determining the best option for utility customers.
To support this research for EPSA, GF Energy:
- met with all three rating agencies (Standard & Poor’s, Moody’s and FitchRatings) and various New-York-based financial institutions and investment bankers
- reviewed many state regulatory proceedings and testimonies
- examined various recent competitive power supply Requests for Proposals (RFPs).
2005 US Nuclear Update
Buy versus Build White Paper for Electric Power Supply Association
New Mergers Article for Energy Biz
C&I Market Survey Analysis
The results of a customer survey conducted in 2004 in three states: California, Texas and New York, where we ask questions like:
- How many competitive suppliers are there?
- Have you switched or stayed with the local utility?
- If you did not switch, what has been your experience? If you switched, what has been your success?
- Are you pleased with deregulation, overall?
Electric Utility Asset Management (2004)
In its most developed form, asset management calls for a utility to have the pulse on every critical piece of equipment and apply smart operation and maintenance approaches to avoid outages, meet all customer service requirements and replace the equipment at the best time and at the cheapest cost (especially at a time when capital is scarce).
To capture the extent and impacts of the new trend, GF Energy surveyed new asset management trends across U.S. utilities. We looked at how asset management efforts were organized and what were their benefits. Next, we assessed the extent of condition-based across various equipment classes (e.g., underground cables, transformers). We found that asset management can reduce O&M costs by 10-15%, delay capital needs by 1-3 years, and even increase revenues by 5-10%, all of this while being more responsive to the needs of regulators.