NRG and Bluewater: Is There a Catch?
I don't think so. NRG VP Drew Murphy yesterday repeatedly spoke of claiming the first mover advantage in talking to local and national media. He noted the proximity of offshore wind to a large load centers—in contrast to onshore wind in Texas and the Midwest which will require billions in transmission lines to get to customers.Writing in the News Journal, Aaron Nathans spoke with a number of environmentalists whose reactions to the acquisition ranged from suspicious to enthusiastic. One suspicion expressed in comments to this blog and privately, is that NRG would use the acquisition to keep a lid on wind power. For instance, would NRG prefer to sell power from coal rather than sell power from the wind farm?
I discussed this yesterday with Nathans and professor Jeremy Firestone, who said, "You're always going to put the wind onto the system. You'd never turn it off."
I agree. Once the wind farm is built, NRG would want to sell every drop of power it produces. The wind farm's peak capacity will be higher than needed to meet the needs of the power purchase agreements (PPAs) with Delmarva Power, the Delaware Municipal Energy Corporation (DEMEC) and any other customers that sign on in order to ensure a steady flow of power. Once the wind farm's PPA customers needs are met, any additional power generated can be sold to the grid at any price Bluewater can get.
Unlike a coal plant, which would have to burn more fuel to generate more power, there is no marginal cost to selling extra wind power. If the turbines are already spinning, any additional power sold to the grid goes straight to the bottom line—even if it is sold at two cents a kilowatt hour.
Peter Mandelbaum will remain president of Bluewater Wind and lead wind power development for NRG.

