by James A. Bacon

A recurring debate in Virginia’s push toward a net-zero electric grid has been whether demand for electricity in the Old Dominion will grow or shrink. Citing expansion of demand from data centers and electric vehicles, Dominion Energy has contended for years that demand for electricity would continue increasing at a steady rate. Environmentalists scoffed, saying that conservation measures would enable Virginians to meet aggressive goals to phase out fossil fuel plants and rely heavily upon solar and wind.

I highlighted this debate back in 2018 in this article. Dominion forecast a 1.4% annual increase in peak demand over the next 15 years.

“Actual electricity demand growth over the next several years will not come close to Dominion’s inflated 1.3% growth” as forecast in its 2017 IRP, wrote William Shobe, director of the Center for Economic Policy Studies at the University of Virginia. “Something like 0.5% to 0.7% is much more likely. And this is with data center demand.”

“It’s time for Dominion to change its model and assumptions to reflect reality—there is less load growth than predicted, and what load is coming to the Commonwealth comes from companies demanding renewable energy options,” said Will Cleveland with the Southern Environmental Law Center.

So, what’s the story nearly six years later? Here’s the headline from today’s Washington Post: “AI and the boom in clean-tech manufacturing are pushing America’s power grid to the brink. Utilities can’t keep up.”

Northern Virginia, says the Post, needs the equivalent of several large nuclear power plants to serve all the new data centers planned and under construction.

Far from overestimating energy demand, Dominion under-estimated it. Virginia’s major electric power company foresaw increased demand from data centers and electric vehicles, but it did not anticipate the crypto-mining revolution or the explosion of artificial intelligence, both of which require massive amounts of energy-intensive computer power. As far as Dominion’s environmentalist critics go, they totally screwed the pooch.

Writes the Post: “Utility projections for the amount of power [electric utilities] will need over the next five years have nearly doubled and are expected to grow, according to a review of regulatory filings by the research firm Grid Strategies.”

The Post published this graph taken from Dominion’s Integrated Resource Plan:

Meanwhile, Virginia environmentalists are still fighting fossil fuels at every turn. This is literally insane (if by insane we mean disconnected from reality). As the U.S. digitizes and electrifies its economy, we need any kind of power source we can get our hands on. That includes fossil-fuel-generated power. Even coal. Given the long lead times to build new generating capacity, we must at the very least maintain existing fossil-fuel power sources.

Shutting down coal and natural-gas facilities to achieve net zero is risking economic suicide. If we persist in our maniacal course, Virginia will be facing years of blackouts and brownouts.


Share this article



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)



ADVERTISEMENT

(comments below)


Comments

58 responses to “Whoops!”

  1. WayneS Avatar

    If we persist in our maniacal course, Virginia will be facing years of blackouts and brownouts.

    Maybe that’s part of the plan. A lot of Virginia environmentalists want us to be just like California, and rolling blackouts will put us that much closer to achieving their dream…

    1. Califorification…….. then comes the homeless, the crime, the drugs….. Let them ‘Try that in a small town!’ esp during a blackout

    2. how_it_works Avatar
      how_it_works

      Are they assuming that global warming will eventually give us California weather in Virginia?

      I can’t imagine anything that could possibly add more to the suckage that is Northern Virginia than freezing your butt off due to a rolling blackout during a cold snap.

      1. Lefty665 Avatar
        Lefty665

        Earthquakes, fires and La Nino winds maybe close?? All California is lacking is hordes of locusts. Maybe next year for them:)

  2. walter smith Avatar
    walter smith

    Jim! It is un-possible that “experts,” particularly experts from UVA, could ever be wrong. How dare you!
    You were never in the Climate Cult to be called a heretic, but even after Big Brother makes you love the “science” of “Climate Change,” you will still be kicked off of the island, and a persona non grata at UVA to boot!
    I understand some of the giants in the data center world are considering their own small modular nuclear reactors… Everybody knows they hate the environment!

    Seriously, people – time to get real on your “renewable” energy !d!0cy – quit emulating California. Nuclear power. Gas power. Gas cars. Electric cars never mandated.

  3. John Harvie Avatar
    John Harvie

    Jim, are there mothballed generation plants that can be restarted?

    1. I doubt they can be under VCEA nor can new plants be built. Dominion said it wanted to build a new gas fired plant to help meet this growth and the SCC said they had not met the emergency status required by VCEA.

      Virginia is presently locked into blackouts. PJM almost went down Christmas 2022 and that was a relatively mild cold wave. Time to prepare for blackouts. Warnings failed.

  4. We already face blackouts so time to emergency services et al to start planning for them.
    https://www.cfact.org/2024/02/20/planning-for-climate-blackouts/
    Climate blackouts in the sense they are due to climate policy.

    1. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      The blackouts experienced in TX and NC in recent years were due to weather (not “climate policy”) and the failure of fossil fuel-based generation.

    2. Eric the half a troll Avatar
      Eric the half a troll

      The blackouts experienced in TX and NC in recent years were due to weather (not “climate policy”) and the failure of fossil fuel-based generation.

  5. Greg Abbott Avatar
    Greg Abbott

    Jim, the forecast in the Post article is the Dominion forecast. So, you are basically saying that Dominion’s forecast is confirmed by Dominion’s forecast. I would encourage you to take a deeper dive into actual historical data from prior Dominion IRPs. You reference the 2017 IRP. That IRP forecasted that the summer coincident peak load would be 19,058 MWs in 2022. Dominion’s actual recorded summer coincident peak for 2022 was 16,945 MWs, significantly less than Dominion’s 2017 IRP forecast. Dominion has had fairly flat load growth according to the historical data. The previous high for summer coincident peak load was 17,521 MWs recorded in 2011. Datacenter load growth is growing at a rapid rate, but this has been offset by decreased load by the other customers. Now, AI certainly is capable of catapulting the load forecast substantially higher since a single AI datacenter campus can have a load in excess of 500 MWs compared to existing datacenters with loads of about 20 MWs. It remains to be seen how many of these will locate in Dominion’s service territory.

    1. That forecast is from PJM not Dominion. Nor does it include AI, Cryptostuff or even EV growth or other transition nonsense driven growth. As the article says it is based on data center construction and plans but plans are typically optimistic.

      1. Greg Abbott Avatar
        Greg Abbott

        PJM’s forecast for datacenters, included in the PJM load forecast, is based on forecasts that PJM receives from Dominion and NOVEC. Thus, the PJM forecast incorporates and is based on the Dominion forecast. You have to get deep into the weeds of the 2023 IRP dueling testimonies from various parties to examine the origins (Dominion and NOVEC) of the PJM datacenter forecast. But you are correct that PJM put their name on it and that makes it their forecast. Regardless, the historic data is the historic data. The Commission rejected Dominion’s load forecast in the 2018 IRP case given its inaccuracies in predicting actual historic results over every IRP going back to the 2009 IRP and directed that PJM’s forecast be used going forward starting with Dominion’s 2019 IRP Update. Thus, there is not as long of a track record to examine the accuracy of the PJM forecast for Dominion’s coincident peak load to what actually has occurred. So, it is too soon to tell if it contains the same upper bias as the Dominion forecast. I do think that before too much faith is put into any forecast, an examination of prior performance of the forecaster in making accurate forecasts is warranted. What is the track record? Did it have a large error compared to actuals or a small error (all forecasts will have some error)? Is it as likely to be inaccurate to the high side as the low side or is there an observed bias where it is predominately in error in the same direction indicating a bias in the forecast?

      2. There’s a lot of talk here about PJM’s forecast. It’s actually the “2024 Preliminary PJM Load Forecast” and you can read the whole thing on PJM’s public website. In a separate document, PJM adopts an adjustment to Dominion’s forecast for anticipated data center loads. Look at that adjustment: over the next 15 years, over 22,000 MW of additional growth for data centers alone. This preliminary forecast is, as noted, a committee’s recommendation based on Dominion’s input, and it will become a final forecast to the extent PJM’s Board adopts it. PJM has disagreed significantly with Dominion’s inputs in the past and will not hesitate to substitute its own.

        Look at the divergence of the red and blue lines here (without and with the data center loads): https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/e5abef5417e79b1fc3f4444fd43f26546a39715abc7d17402ea91b093ef62674.png

    2. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      Gov Abbott:

      Demand for power is surging (pun intended) all across the country.

      https://www.msn.com/en-us/money/companies/ar-BB1jtM69

      1. Greg Abbott Avatar
        Greg Abbott

        Don’t tell Dominion. They will want to serve it all. At the SCC approved profit margin, of course. 🙂

  6. WayneS Avatar

    I shan’t be holding my breath waiting for William Shobe and Will Cleveland to step up and admit their claims were not correct.

  7. James Wyatt Whitehead Avatar
    James Wyatt Whitehead

    Paying more for less. Even the Cookie Monster is griping about that now. Territory that was once the domain of Oscar.

  8. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    there you go again, quoting that liberal rag that most in BR think is disreputable and not to be believed…. 😉

  9. DJRippert Avatar
    DJRippert

    For what it is worth – my AI based bias detector defined this article as:

    Direction of bias: Right (Right, Left)
    Degree of bias: Minimal (Minimal, Moderate, Strong, Extreme)

    Nothing is rated as no bias so this is pretty darn even-handed.

    This article – https://redstate.com/bonchie/2024/03/07/note-to-republicans-stay-out-of-the-way-and-let-biden-self-destruct-during-the-sotu-n2171070 rated Right, Strong

    Lots of work still to do on this.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Can AI explain why a Red State like Texas is all over wind power when they have so much oil they ooze it?

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        Not in any way that I know.

      2. Turbocohen Avatar
        Turbocohen

        Yes, Way back when W Bush was governor and Gary Mauro was Railroad Commissioner, then Governor Bush launched a huge effort to expand the states wind power investment through deregulation and setting realistic goals that let energy investors offset the huge upstart costs.. Yes he was known as an oil man, but in reality he was an energy man who got little credit for launching Texas into the wind power era. https://www.technologyreview.com/2016/08/29/70295/george-w-bush-helped-make-texas-a-clean-energy-powerhouse/

        Also read this. https://www.sej.org/publications/sejournal-sp2015/great-texas-wind-rush

      3. Turbocohen Avatar
        Turbocohen

        Yes, Way back when W Bush was governor and Gary Mauro was Railroad Commissioner, then Governor Bush launched a huge effort to expand the states wind power investment through deregulation and setting realistic goals that let energy investors offset the huge upstart costs.. Yes he was known as an oil man, but in reality he was an energy man who got little credit for launching Texas into the wind power era. https://www.technologyreview.com/2016/08/29/70295/george-w-bush-helped-make-texas-a-clean-energy-powerhouse/

        Also read this. https://www.sej.org/publications/sejournal-sp2015/great-texas-wind-rush

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          I note many other states nearby including Oklahoma and Nebraska have become “wind” states.

          1. Turbocohen Avatar
            Turbocohen

            The irony is that most of the opposition to wind back then came from the left. Its totally flopped now and dems want to spend more without factoring in more baseload.. I dont get it.

          2. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            so the folks that favored solar , opposed wind?

          3. Turbocohen Avatar
            Turbocohen

            Republicans supported that too. Dems partisan shenanigans screwed it up. All for money laundering. Same as Ukraine.

          4. WayneS Avatar

            Many square miles of virtually flat land and [generally] predictable winds. It’s sort of like offshore wind but without the ocean…

          5. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Actually on small ridges:

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/115086bbaf954b0a6fd1a1dddcde6b5b8643ea7d96368cf715230707af7c9089.png

            the wind sweeps across the plains and the turbines catch it when it starts rising.

            Farmers out that way LIKE the turbines and the money it generates for them.

            Back east, folks consider them blights… along with solar farms and nukes.

          6. And, not at the top of a ridge:
            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/250ccb42280cf7046f61b571947d13a2adb3d15f687dec96f3bc8e90aa97035c.jpg

            Three windmills on a small hill do not make me wrong, Larry.

  10. LarrytheG Avatar
    LarrytheG

    So we need to build more Nukes and SMRs, right?

    Last I heard, Nukes cost out the wazoo, even the newer SMRS.

    this caught my eye in the article:

    “Northern Virginia needs the equivalent of several large nuclear power plants to serve all the new data centers planned and under construction”

    I was thinking… Hey, we should propose building those nukes in NoVa … NOT RoVa. If they want it – they should build it right there where they need it. Don’t be expecting “subsidies” from RoVa!

    1. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      What lake in Northern Virginia is big enough to support the cooling of “several large nuclear power plants”?

      1. LarrytheG Avatar
        LarrytheG

        The Potomac?

        1. Stephen Haner Avatar
          Stephen Haner

          Yeah, a meltdown there wouldn’t destroy any place the US actually needed….

          Sorry I missed all this fun but today we visited Arrakis and Paul Muad’dib, my favorite climate disaster SF novel….Fans of the book will love it, those who haven’t read the book will be lost.

          1. LarrytheG Avatar
            LarrytheG

            Ah, got it… if a place is “valuable” , they get to site their Nuke somewhere that is less so?

            Got some on the James, and on the North Anna, why not the Potomac?

            Oh, that’s right all those folks calling them dangerous and stuff when they’re not?

            😉

          2. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            Calvert Cliffs, MD is 58 miles from DC.

      2. WayneS Avatar

        The Occoquan Reservoir would work….

  11. Paul Sweet Avatar
    Paul Sweet

    West Texas is quite windy. Unfortunately they didn’t weatherize their windmills.

    There are a lot of greenies in and around Austin. I read that Georgetown (about 25 miles north of Austin) claims to get all of its electricity from wind and solar. Of course those electrons have to travel hundreds of miles from the windmills to the city, and get mixed in with zillions of other electrons along the way.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      I don’t know how far electrons can move but I’m pretty sure they can do it a lot “cleaner” that fossil fuels can in general and easy to connect than pipelines are.
      https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/6cd3be4a8d08f470bf3cbcfe7f4ef3fff6242c6e0bdcdd4a7275e4e971c78fd7.png

    2. Stephen Haner Avatar
      Stephen Haner

      One of the trailers before Dune was for a remake of Twister (it’s all remakes these days) and I loved watching the storm rip up a bunch of turbines….

  12. Turbocohen Avatar
    Turbocohen

    The #1 skillset Va Beach/Norfolk exports is nuke systems expertise. Build small modular nuke in VA. Problem solved.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      If modern nukes could passively shut down instead of potentially melting down, they could be sited in more locations than North Anna and Surry.

      If they could load-follow, i.e. dynamically alter output to match demand, they could work in tandem with gas, wind, solar to provide a strong and reliable grid.

      If they could provide power at a competitive price in addition to the two things above, they would be an easy choice.

      Unfortunately , they can do none of these right now.

      “The first SMR deployment project in the US was the Carbon Free Power Project, which planned to deploy six 77 MWe NuScale reactors, reduced from twelve in earlier plans. Estimated target electricity generation price after subsidies was $89/MWh in 2023, an increase from $58/MWh in 2021. The increased generation cost led to the decision to cancel the project in November 2023.[81] ”

      Gas and solar currently provide power for about 1/3 that amount.

      Nukes are a no go on economics alone these days.

      1. Turbocohen Avatar
        Turbocohen

        Deregulate energy and nuke is cheapest.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          worldwide? Can you show me a single country including those with minimal regulations or for than fact an inhabited island that now has to use diesel – installing an SMR to save on costs?

    2. Lefty665 Avatar
      Lefty665

      Build several small modular nukes to supplement the roughly 1/3 of Virginia’s power coming from large nuclear. That can also offset some of the more than half coming from natural gas if someone does not like that source. Coal is really pretty small as a source in Virginia these days.

  13. energyNOW_Fan Avatar
    energyNOW_Fan

    The good news is that we do have wind and solar to help with the demand growth. The other thing is our monopoly utility system favors building new facilities as rate-payers are held hostage. After that we need to wait for the Left to come to its senses. And maybe move to a Redder State, but the Left is moving there too. Go figure.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      I thought Texas was king of onshore wind?

      1. DJRippert Avatar
        DJRippert

        Nobody serious criticizes the use of wind or solar power. The question is how fast (and at what cost) wind and/or solar can replace fossil fuels.

        1. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          solar is pretty quick if you can get the panels. Wind is not as quick but probably as quick as a gas plant and way quicker than a nuke.

          We could do ALL without making any one the enemy of the other.

        2. LarrytheG Avatar
          LarrytheG

          Being a guy who actually does run a technology business , you almost surely know that advancing computer technology will likely bring bigger, more powerful computers that don’t use any more energy or less.

          Now days, a full-up cellphone with GPS sits on a watch that uses far less power than even the phone.

          The problem we have here in BR is what I call the “snapshot” perspective, looking at a point in time rather than a larger context and continuum / timeline.

          It’s sorta like looking at a cell phone two years ago where a new bluetooth or near field communication is not working in some situations and concluding that cellphones are not ready or perhaps even because some of them have their batteries catch on fire.

          Anyone who spends any time at all with technology, software, hardware, firmware, etc today, KNOWs that a lot of technology is pushed fast into the market, KNOWING, that subsequent updates will be required.

          In fact, if you buy a new phone or computer, when you first bring it up, you’re going to have to go get the latest update because even though you bought it yesterday, the software on it is months old.

          It’s that way with cell phones, and cars, both EV and non EV.

          This time next year, it’s likely that not only will EV batteries be lighter , they may well be “pluggable” and swappable instead of just charging them.

          https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/c46b11e5d5360053567bc43d736c0ded827920598b2081596cf4aaee4dd6ed2f.png

          Think about it – no more “range”issues. You can take a “spare” with you and/or pick one up and turn in the old one at a service station like you would a propane bottle or car battery.

          All of this is going to happen with EVs and the only real question is when.

          Don’t listen to the naysayers and “anti” folk – and why do they think that way to start with? This is the way that technology has been working for the last 50-100 years.

          1. DJRippert Avatar
            DJRippert

            You’re confusing chips with everything else. Moore’s Law only applies to chips. Arguably, Wright’s Law might be applied to batteries but Wright’s Law does not call for exponential change.

            “All of this is going to happen with EVs and the only real question is when.”

            I agree.

            So, if we don’t know “when”, why does our General Assembly think that all new car sales by 2035 will be EVs?

            FWIW – I am less concerned about the progress of batteries than the progress of the grid.

            While the units of technology may become more energy efficient, the number of units is growing faster than the per-unit efficiencies.

            For example, Sam Altman is the CEO of OpenAI. He believes that AI will require $7T worth of computing infrastructure in order to remain on its exponential growth path over the coming years.

            While totals are hard to find, total global data center construction spending in 2023 was about $500B.

            Altman wants 14X that much to support AI.

  14. Steve Lane Avatar
    Steve Lane

    I asked William Shop about his forecast.

    Do I sense a little schadenfreude? Forecasters (academic or otherwise) must live with error, of course.

    The straight answer to your question is that my forecast (based on data through 2016) was low because of data center growth that outstripped the forecasts of me, of Dominion and of the army of private consultant forecasts at the time. Dominion (and PJM) both badly under-forecast data center growth at the time. Even a casual look at Dominion’s forecast from that time shows that it was what dead wrong. Dominion’s forecast asserted that residential demand would rise. It didn’t. Dominion forecast that commercial demand (excl. data centers) would rise. It didn’t; it fell. Dominion forecast that industrial demand would turn around. It didn’t. At the time I did my 2017 forecast, no one did separate DC forecasts, not Dominion, not PJM, not me. It was too small as a share of total demand. We added a rough adjustment for data center growth based on what private industry studies were available. They were too low.

    Interestingly, Dominion way under-forecast DC growth because they applied a Bass diffusion model to DC growth. I’m sure you will know why that was a terrible choice. Soon after the 2017 forecast, I started looking into data centers as a breakout long-term source of growth. I have attached my resulting analysis (using data through 2020). From this, you will at least see that I follow the data. It didn’t take long for my forecast to outstrip Dominion’s sloppy forecasting work and point out that data centers were soon going to dominate growth in electricity demand.

    There you have it. I will keep making forecasts and will keep learning from the data as it has new things to teach me. And this will have the ancillary benefit of giving you a chance to offer commentary on other people’s work. It will keep us both busy.

    wms

    1. walter smith Avatar
      walter smith

      I appreciate that he supplied an answer. But just to reiterate – “experts” are not always right. “Experts” are not God. “Experts” cannot predict the future. “Experts” should expect to be challenged, share their data, show their assumptions, etc.
      The “science” is never settled.
      The Green renewable energy fad is a delusion – based on faulty models, trying to change human behavior, and quite harmful to the not rich elite.
      Nuclear is environmentally friendly and can run at near 100%, unlike the non-dependable, not very well storeable “renewables”. A unicorn fantasy. AA grift.

    2. DJRippert Avatar
      DJRippert

      OK, I’ll bite …

      The Bass Diffusion Model provides a good framework for understanding the adoption of consumer technologies but its assumptions and simplifications make it a poor choice for forecasting data center growth. The complexity, strategic nature, and dynamic technological environment of data center expansion require a more nuanced approach that considers a broader range of factors beyond mere product adoption dynamics.

      In other words, data centers are not consumer products.

      That seems like a pretty big “miss”.

      Was it intentional?

  15. f/k/a_tmtfairfax Avatar
    f/k/a_tmtfairfax

    Clearly, technology will find ways to make energy use more efficient. But technology will also find new ways to do old things and ways to do new things. Who could have predicted data mining for cryptocurrency? To move to a fossil-free energy world, don’t we need to determine what level of renewable energy generation, storage and distribution would be needed just to do what we do today with fossil fuel generation, storage and distribution and then ramp up those figures for expected growth? I suspect the truth would freakout all but the true believers.

    This also assumes that people will continue to be able to choose their destinies. If I can choose my gender, I can choose to live in a suburb in the largest house I’ve ever owned on lot that is about the same size as the largest lot I’ve ever owned rather than in some cramped condo in the center city. This is our retirement home. It’s also the most energy efficient home we’ve ever owned, but it sure isn’t a condo in downtown Raleigh.

    Itt’s about the only thing with which I agreed with Obama, but he was right when he said our energy policy needs all of the above.

    1. LarrytheG Avatar
      LarrytheG

      Wouldn’t we do similar to what we did with whale oil and horse poop?

Leave a Reply