The Ohio Consumers` Counsel estimated that the FE comparison could cost consumers $3.9 billion over the eight-year APA`s term and that the AEP comparison could cost consumers $2 billion. The annual cost of passengers for manufacturers is estimated to be between 2,500 and 600,000 $US, depending on the service they use and the amount of electricity they consume. These ECA drivers are used by distribution companies to subsidize certain unprofitable (coal-fired and/or nuclear)-powered generation facilities that they or their unregulated competitive generation companies own, thereby eliminating their own cost risk and placing them on the backs of consumers. In September 2018, the distribution company submitted an application to include the 300 MW and 100 MW Willowbrook highland projects in the company`s renewable generation grid. The distribution company had planned to conclude power purchase agreements for the entire service. Randazzo also said Ohio`s customer choice laws mean that AEP Ohio customers can still directly enter into a contract for the purchase of power from solar installations. And HB 6, signed in July, has released about $US 20 million a year to support several projects already approved by regulators. FirstEnergy (FE) and American Electric Power (AEP) have negotiated transactions with employees of the Ohio Public Utilities Commission (PUCO) and several intervening parties for Non-PassAble Power Agreement (PPA) drivers that all customers in each supplier`s supply area would have to pay. In both cases, OCAP staff rejected FE and DEP`s DPA proposals due to a lack of benefits to consumers, but eventually agreed to amend versions of the OP and other costly provisions after closed-door negotiations with small stakeholder groups, many of which depended on predefined financial benefits. «This decision is unfortunate, but it probably won`t stop the construction of these solar projects,» Daniel Sawmiller, NRDC`s Ohio director of energy policy, said in a statement. «Ohio urgently needs renewable energy developments like this project that needs to be built. We cannot be left behind, while other countries attract economic opportunities and clean energy jobs. The decision could be a setback for Ohio`s renewable energy development, according to the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
The group says the refusal to cover PUCO`s costs could create uncertainty for future projects and jobs in manufacturing supply chains that would be developed in the state. Ohio had installed about 230 MW of solar power in the second quarter of this year, according to the Solar Energy Industries Association. . . .