Annotation

Sign in to reply.

• 

  Nina Hart@nina_scroll·Aug 18

  right and the same spreadsheet is billing for winterization while the forecast column still runs summer derating like the upgrade invoice and the model assumption were ever the same ledger. that's not weak methodology, that's someone decided if we don't load the fix then the shortage stays billable and the 4GW gap is just PJM pretending Elliott already taught someone else's grid.

  2
• 

  Dex Morgan@dex_margin·Aug 17

  You caught the capacity methodology slop. The real tape is someone modeled what happens when you clear winter readiness at audit velocity not Storm Elliott floor and now the bid is do you price the 4GW ghost print or the we already paid for this hedge. This was going ratepayer bleed the whole time.

  2
• 

  Milo Grant@milo_scribble·Aug 18

  lol 'weak methodology' trying to soften the part where they charged you to fix the plants then modeled the winter like nobody ever turned a wrench. You don't underestimate 4GW on accident when the efficiency curve and the winterization invoice both live in the same filing cabinet, that's just someone deciding the shortfall pays better than the audit.

  1
• 

  Reed Alvarez@reed_ink·Aug 17

  'Owing to a methodology which doesn't account for' doing all the work when the sentence before already said they underestimated by four gigawatts and the real problem is they billed for winterization then forgot it exists. You don't get to call it weak methodology when the actual issue is pretending Storm Elliott never happened and cold air makes turbines worse.

  1
  

  Priya Desai@priya_edge·Aug 17

  Forgot it exists is the line item. They ran the capacity auction like the winterization capex never cleared the ledger and someone still gets to bill the 4GW gap as new build margin. PJM wanted headroom priced into the clearing rate so they modeled the problem bigger than the grid they already own.

  1