Key Data on Dominion Wind Project Still Secret

Cover page blocking public access to the engineering and cost details for Dominion’s proposed $10 billion plus Coastal Virginia Offshore Wind project.

By David Wojick

A previous article published by Bacon’s Rebellion and the Committee for a Constructive Tomorrow challenged the notion that Dominion Energy Virginia can build a huge amount of wind and solar generating capacity and retire all of its fossil-fueled generators with almost none of the enormous storage capacity that is required to make the renewables viable.

This proposed long-term plan does not work and Dominion knows that, but in the short run it can make billions in profit by building the unreliable wind and solar. The disastrous unreliability shows up only in the long run.  

Now Dominion has topped that long-term deception with a bigger short-term one. The utility has applied for approval of a gigantic offshore wind power project. This is the beginning of the con described in my study.

Dominion’s proposal has two very specific (and very big) deceptions. The engineering is secret and the published cost estimate is preposterously low.

The proposed project consists of 176 monster wind machines, each with a generating capacity of 14.7 MW, which is as big as giant windmills come. Each is over 1.5 times as high as the Washington monument. The total capacity is roughly 2,600 MW. As pointed out, there is no storage capacity to make this intermittent power reliably available, so the power will just come and go with the wind.

Secret engineering

The first deception has to do with the engineering data needed to assess the project’s viability. There isn’t any! I am not making this up.

To be sure, there is a voluminous set of documents called the “Generation Appendix” that no doubt provides lots of engineering analysis. But the entire corpus is classified “extraordinarily sensitive” and so is not available for analysis. (Editor’s note:  See previous references to this secrecy here and here.)

The stated reason for this wholesale secrecy is that Dominion got some bids for the project. Maybe for the machines, or the construction, or something else. We are not told, but apparently not revealing these bids is deemed so vital that all of the engineering is secret.

My personal interest is in the hurricane analysis, which should not involve bid amounts. Offshore wind has been developed almost entirely where they do not get hurricanes, while offshore Virginia is hurricane alley. Every year a lot of storms, including really powerful ones, make the turn and run up the coast.

I happen to have a background in failure mode analysis and I am skeptical that these monster towers can be made hurricane-proof. In fact there was a study a few years back that predicted significant hurricane damage to offshore U.S. windmills. When there is this degree of potential for catastrophe, it is standard engineering practice to have the proposed design checked by independent engineers.

Then too, Dominion has had two huge 12 MW test machines on site for some time now. We would like to see that data in full, which has nothing to do with any bids for the main project.

While those parties admitted to the quasi-judicial Virginia State Corporation Commission process can challenge a wholesale sensitivity claim of this magnitude, it seems none has done so. The public can comment on the proceeding, but these comments have no standing. The ratepayers are left in the dark.

It is ridiculous that the engineering for a project of this great scope, novelty and danger should be done in secret. This secrecy is a wholesale form of deception.

Preposterously low LCOE

At the other extreme we have a single public cost estimate, which plays a pivotal role in the approval process. How this estimate was derived is part of the secret engineering. The problem is that the number itself is preposterous.

The magic number is called the “levelized cost of electricity” or simply the LCOE. This number is widely used in the industry so its nature is well-established. It is the entire life cycle cost of the power generator and its generation divided by the amount of power generated in that generator’s life. The standard units of measure are dollars per megawatt-hour.

Note that the included costs run from engineering and construction, through operation, maintenance and repair, to shut-down and decommissioning, which may include removal. New transmission capacity is also included and this project is 27 miles out to sea.

Obviously, when a project has not been built the LCOE is just an engineering estimate, with lots of assumptions.

Here is the catch: the Dominion offshore project is being built pursuant to the strangely named and very green Virginia Clean Economy Act. In this case LCOE plays an unusually pivotal role. Normally the approval of huge projects like this is up to the state’s electric power regulator. But the VCEA says that as long as the LCOE stays below a certain threshold, approval is automatic. So the LCOE is very important.

This is where is gets truly strange. Dominion says the automatic approval threshold is staying under $125/MWh and while I cannot replicate that I will accept it for now. What I cannot accept is Dominion’s claim that this monster offshore project has a LCOE of just $73/MWh, which is way below the threshold, so meets it handily.

The reason for my skepticism is simple. The U.S. Energy Information Administration tracks LCOEs for different types of generators. Its present estimated average for offshore wind is a whopping $118/MWh. This is 60% higher than the Dominion estimate! It is also very close to the threshold value.

In fact the EIA estimate may be low. Last year the procurement cost for a major US offshore wind project was announced at $96/MWh. That is just procurement so it does not include life cycle O&M, repair and replacement, or decommissioning and removal. In particular, removal of the underwater foundations could be very expensive.

In summary, all this secrecy is wrong. The ratepayers and the public have a right to know what is going on with this project. Dominion’s claim that all of the project engineering is “extraordinarily sensitive” is ridiculous. This claim should be challenged and rejected.

Dominion’s extremely low LCOE needs to be investigated. It is certainly possible that the correct value exceeds the threshold for automatic approval.  In fact Dominion recently announced a 20% increase in the project cost and prices are still going up.

Show us the engineering.

David Wojick, Ph.D. is an independent analyst working at the intersection of science, technology and policy. He has been on the faculty of Carnegie Mellon University and the staffs of the U.S. Office of Naval Research and the Naval Research Lab. 


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

33 responses to “Key Data on Dominion Wind Project Still Secret”

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      Yes. Shows offshore wind at $115 give or take, not the $73 Dominion claims. It all depends on 1) what you include and 2) costs you assume. With all that hidden, any comparison is impossible. Intentionally.

      Note the LCOE on battery storage. Imagine building enough of that to back up 2600 MW of wind. Should that be counted as part of the wind project cost? (Actually, maybe not, since the LCOE for the turbines accounts for their intermittency already. But it will be a necessary extra cost.)

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        If we start off right now with the current grid as currently powered – we have adequate reliable capacity by many account.

        What wind and solar will do is not dictate dismantling those plants but instead whenever wind/solar is generating, the gas plants won’t have to use as much gas and if there is a lot of wind/solar a lot less gas will be used.

        why is that a wrong way of seeing this issue?

        1. David Wojick Avatar
          David Wojick

          Two things are wrong. First this OSW proposal is based on VCEA which mandates all gas plants shut down.

          Second just idling the gas plants when wind and solar are producing raises the cost because you are still paying for the idled gas plants. We have had this discussion before.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            were does it say they MUST shut down? That’s more a goal than a dictate, no?

            I’ve read the boogeyman stuff here in BR for sure, but pretty sure there is no drop-dead closing date for each gas plant, right?

            Does anyone really think come some date , we’ll close them all down on that date?

            We idled some (not all) coal plants, right?

            So we can idle some and eventually do to them what we are now doing with coal plants, right?

            We have shuttered coal plants right now – so is that also a “cost”?

            where was the “concern” about those closures?

          2. David Wojick Avatar
            David Wojick

            The drop dead dates are for total emission reductions from Dominion’s gas and coal plants. Absent a carbon capture miracle, no emissions means no plant running. Dominion’s official plan specifies just when each plant will shut down. You might look at it.

            We have had this discussion before. Are you that forgetful? Or more than one person?

          3. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            the drop-dead dates are not real. They are a goal and subsequent GAs can and will make changes as we go along. To claim that we have no choice but to shut down plants is not credible.

            The reality is that we will continue to burn gas but as we add more solar/wind, we will reduce the amount of gas that we burn. Over time, we’ll reassess to see where we are and make mid-course changes – pretty much like we’ve done with auto emissions and power-plant emissions over the decades. That scenario is much more likely than the boggeyman “w’re all gonna have to live in caves or die”. Conservatives are out of ideas about just about everything. Their downstream view is pretty much ameggedon.. caused by liberals…

            we’re going to see innovations like we’ve always seen in the past. it’s happening now as we speak.
            not only storage, but nukes, perhaps hydrogen. 10% believe climate threats are a hoax. The vast majority believe it’s real and support the changes but they are not the zealots the anti folks portray them as. They’re not going to live in caves but then again, they’re not going to stand by when change is needed either.
            IMHO.

          4. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            not forgetful and not more than one person but a total skeptic that there is no choice but to shut down all plants on a date certain. total balderdash and boogeyman blather.

  1. October 27, 2020, I asked Dominion about the wind turbine lifespan and if decommissioning costs were included in the project. After several follow up inquiries, they replied Dec. 9, 2021. Lifespan–30 years. Cost estimate: “Yes, an estimate of $814M in 2021 dollars has been included as an Asset Retirement Obligation in the Rider/CPCN application that was filed with the State Corporation Commission.”

    After 13 months, there was no point to the story I planned to write because so many others had been published. But now, this information might be useful. If you recall, in Nov. 2021, the cost went up 2 billion dollars. So the answer to whether the plan included repowering or decommissioning needs to looked at closely:

    “It is our goal to reduce our environmental impact wherever and whenever possible. We will monitor equipment conditions and maintain the turbines with the goal to safely extend the life of the project beyond the design lifespan to create value for our customers. Once decommissioning is necessary, the process is anticipated to be the reverse of construction and installation, with project components transported to an appropriate disposal or recycling facility. We will work with the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) and stakeholders during the decommissioning of the foundations, to ensure special care given to artificial reefs, which we can already see forming at our pilot project. We also anticipate technology to improve over time, enabling us to further reduce any environmental or sustainability issues that may arise.”

    It appears to me there is no model for removing foundations around which artificial reefs have developed, and so additional costs are more likely than not. But ratepayers 30 years out will be the ones to bear the burden.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Did Dominion estimate coal-ash cleanup costs and dismantling of the coal plants? how about the Nukes? Was that cost estimated up front?

      1. “Whataboutism or whataboutery (as in “what about…?”) is a variant of the tu quoque logical fallacy, which attempts to discredit an opponent’s position by charging hypocrisy without directly refuting or disproving the argument.” wikipedia

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          well not really, It’s about double standards.

          do we judge offshore wind differently than we judged other prior power issues?

          and why?

          did Dominion “disclose” all their financial data with regard to the ACP? Did they provide life-cycle and decommissioning costs?

          Why the disparate focus on just one kind of project?

  2. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    I’m no fan of Dominion for a variety of reasons but their approach to wind/solar is not THAT different than their approach to similar issues like coal-ash cleanup, nuke decommissioning, pipelines, even returning refunds for overcharging and not properly accounting for Federal stimulus funds.

    In other words, it has little to do specifically with offshore wind any more or less than their normal way of dealing with other energy issues.

    There is nothing fundamentally different about offshore wind than other sources of power other than the fact that it is intermittent but things like M/O and capital costs and cleanup are little different than their other projects.

    1. Their “normal” is wrong when they don’t address all the costs and approvals are being granted. The fact ratepayers pay the cost and not Dominion is why it has to be said over and over until something changes.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        I agree with that premise but I don’t think there is anything particularly different about it with just wind power specifically. It’s not a problem with offshore wind alone.

  3. Dick Hall-Sizemore Avatar
    Dick Hall-Sizemore

    Does the SCC get to review the engineering and approve it with regard to aspects such as hurricane resistance? Does the SCC get to review the LCOE and develop its own independent estimate? If the answer is yes, I am OK with this. If the answer is no, certainly there should be some independent review of these projects under which Dominion is guaranteed a return of about 10 percent.

    1. David Wojick Avatar
      David Wojick

      Trust us, we are the government? I prefer an independent estimate.

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        but you want the govt to require it? 😉

        1. David Wojick Avatar
          David Wojick

          No idea what you mean. I want the government to require that the data needed be publicly available, as well as Dominion’s analysis.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            the same govt you do not trust?
            😉

  4. For some perspective on the risks and burdens of Virginia offshore wind generation see Final Order of Virginia State Commission re Petition of Virginia Electric and Power Company (November 2, 2018) available at https://scc.virginia.gov/docketsearch/DOCS/4c%24z01!.PDF

    See also Final Order (March 15, 2022) at https://scc.virginia.gov/docketsearch/DOCS/6rd901!.PDF

    1. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      You mean the parts about how all the risks, repeat all the risks, are piled onto the ratepayers? The corruption of this process is breathtaking. If I pound and pound and pound maybe a few sleepy suckers, I mean citizens, will wake up. I’ve given up hope on most legislators.

      1. My “favorite” sentence in emjak’s first link is: “Dominion admits that it does not have detailed information on construction costs for other recent offshore wind projects to confirm the reasonableness of the CVOW Project cost. (46)”

  5. walter smith Avatar
    walter smith

    Is there a way to use shareholders’ proposals to get this info?
    I am a shareholder and would love transparency here. I am also a citizen of Virginia and not a fan of screwing over all the citizens, and our electric grid, for the stock price and dividend.

  6. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
    energyNOW_Fan

    Correct me if wrong, but Virginia has taken the “Mother, Please, I’d rather do it Myself” approach, essentially giving Dominion carte blanche to do whatever they want. The other states are taking low-cost bids from wind project proposers, that have certain performance and cost guarantees. Take two aspirin and call me in the morning.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Virginia went down the wrong path with Dominion – a long time ago including kneecapping the SCC role.

      Now the whining about it seems to be coming primarily from the anti-renewables crowd who seem more concerned with the fact that the same game is being played with offshore wind and renewables.

      1. Stephen Haner Avatar
        Stephen Haner

        Oh, I raised the same bloody hell when the General Assembly dictated construction of the Wise County coal plant, or underground house lines. This is what is so infuriating about you Larry. With your basic honesty, you could be a Dominion director!

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          You have, yes, but most of the anti-renewable guys here did not. That’s the honest truth. This is fundamentally little difference between what Dominion is doing with the offshore wind project than they’ve done with other projects. Has little to do with wind specifically.

    2. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      Those other states don’t allow unlimited campaign contributions from corporations and then allow politicians to do pretty much whatever they want with the money donated. In other words, they do not create Dick Saslaws and Tommy Norments.

  7. […] The Cone of Silence was not broken in this case and the utility will fight like a banshee to keep it in place in the pending debate over its offshore wind […]

  8. […] secrecy which has already been called to the attention of Bacon’s Rebellion readers (here and here.)  When their own experts or lawyers cite that secret information, their documents are also […]

  9. […] than the others.  Dominion claims it can build the larger project for one-tenth that LCOE (but it won’t show us the […]

Leave a Reply