Academic literature on the topic 'State Electricity Commission of Victoria Management'

The development of natural gas in Victoria is mainly that of the Bass Strait gas fields discovered by Esso and BHP, with the former as operator, and of the Gas and Fuel Corporation of Victoria.Since discovery of natural gas in 1965, the market has grown to the delivery in 1989 of 193 petajoules (PJ), consisting of 157 PJ to the Corporation and 36 PJ for use by the State Electricity Commission for Esso's and BHP's own use.This development has includeed the consolidation of gas utilities in Victoria into one entity and aggressive competition to replace oil in industry and space heating and electricity in water heating. Price advantages conferred through oil price increases in the late 1970s were countered in the early 1980s by the Government realising the opportunity cost through increased taxation.Consideration of the likely growth in the Victorian and Australian economies allows some prediction of the future development of natural gas in Victoria to 2010. While the market is expected to increase at a rate of 3.2 per cent per annum in the medium term, this will fall to 2.3 per cent over the long term.Changes in the numbers of gas appliances in each home and their annual usage, competition from electricity in the hot water market, demand management, losses of some industries, new markets such as NGV and cogeneration and the effects of greenhouse gases will all have their effects.

Purpose This paper aims to demonstrate advantages of using the photo elicitation technique from sociology, ethnography and visual anthropology to management history through reference to a study of job loss within the State Electricity Commission of Victoria in the Latrobe Valley, Australia, as it was undergoing transition and privatization in the early 1990s. Design/methodology/approach This is a methodology paper exploring photo elicitation and the theoretical perspectives of life course and identity work when applied in management history. Findings The use of photo elicitation encouraged interview participants to share their perspectives about the common experience of job loss in an Australian regional area which gave rise to some common themes about occupational identity and the challenges of being unemployed. Social implications After job loss, some common experiences have been found, namely, depression; drug and alcohol addiction; domestic violence and family break down; and even suicide. Originality/value Use of photo elicitation provided the methodology and framework to undertake original research in management history in an Australian region still experiencing denidustrialization of brown coal mining and power generation.

AbstractThe article analyses whether electricity production from renewable energy sources can be the object of a public service obligation. This question is of particular importance for the State aid assessment of payments to producers of electricity from renewable energy sources. Such payments typically occur under so-called feed-in tariffs, which are a regulatory mechanism used in most Member States to promote the production of electricity from renewable energy sources. The author argues that there are compelling reasons for considering that Member States can introduce public service obligations with respect to the production of electricity from renewable energy sources, and that compensation payments granted are exempted from the notification obligation under Article 88(3) EC treaty, if the beneficiary undertaking receives not more then 30 million EUR per year as compensation, and if its turnover does not exceed 100 million EUR. Should these thresholds be exceeded, the compensation payments need to be notified to the Commission. The Commission will then assess them under the Community framework for public service compensations, which has been adopted in November 2005.

The liberalization of the electricity market, the rise of renewable energy sources, the closure of ageing or environmentally harmful plants and an increasing share of energy coming from third countries, have caused concerns in many Member States with regard to security of supply. It prompted many Member States to introduce so-called capacity mechanisms, which remunerate capacity providers for having capacity available. Because in most cases State resources are deployed, these mechanisms tend to fall within the scope of EU state aid rules. In 2014, the Commission adopted the Energy and Environmental Aid Guidelines (EEAG) which included compatibility criteria for capacity mechanisms. In 2015, the Commission launched a sector inquiry into capacity mechanisms. The Final Report of this sector inquiry was published on the 30th of November 2016, as part of the Commission's ``Winter Package''. The Final Report refines the EEAG and forms a crucial addition to the legal framework regarding capacity mechanisms. The Winter Package equally contains a legislative proposal ``for the regulation of the internal market for electricity'', which lays down common rules for capacity mechanisms. This article will discuss the current legal regime on capacity mechanisms, in light of the recent Winter Package.

In 1935, Congress enacted the Federal Power Act. The Act split jurisdiction over electricity generation and distribution between the Federal and state governments. The Act delegated to the Federal government jurisdiction over interstate wholesales and interstate transmission. The Act gave state governments jurisdiction over intrastate wholesales, intrastate transmission, generation, local distribution, and retail sales. Big, vertically-integrated monopoly utilities dominated the market before and for 60 years after the passage of the Act. However, over time, changes in technology and policy in the wholesale market eroded the dominance of those vertically-integrated monopoly utilities and complicated this jurisdictional bright line. In 2011, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) issued Order 745, requiring wholesale markets to permit demand response to operate on equal footing to traditional sources of generation. Unlike typical electricity generation, demand response involves paying consumers for a commitment not to consume electricity at a certain time. The Supreme Court sustained that Order in the 2016 case FERC v. Electric Power Supply Association. The Order allowed states to opt out of FERC’s demand response rules. This Note advocates for the removal of that state opt-out, analyzes its likely success against court challenges, and explores the possible limits of FERC jurisdiction after the 2020 case National Association of Regulatory Utility Commissioners v. FERC. If demand response reaches its full potential, it could provide as much electricity as hundreds of peak power plants. Removing the opt-out and integrating all possible demand response resources into the wholesale market is particularly timely and important given its potential to alleviate the economic and human toll from widespread blackouts such as the February 2021 Texas power system failure.

This article identifies the statutory obligations, according to which energy corporations must disclose any information that national authorities and the European Commission deem relevant to their duties under European Law. It then specifies the protection of commercially sensitive information under European Energy Law and Law on Trade Secrets along with the mechanisms that transform this protection from paper into reality. It establishes that the Law on Trade Secrets can be used to draw the line at the authorities’ powers. This is significant, as the information that can be requested by the authorities can, and usually does, contain invaluable information, to the dismay of energy corporations electricity, natural gas, hydrocarbons, data, information, commercially sensitive information, trade secrets

This article examines the producer exemption from paying transport charges in the light of European Union sector specific regulation and the European Union state aid rules. In the Netherlands and several other EU Member States, the ministries and/or the energy authorities have decided that producers of electricity will not be charged for using the electricity network for the transport of electricity. These charges have to be paid to the network operator and thereby ensure that this network operator can recover the costs that are made to provide the transport service to the users of the network. EU law assumes that both producers and consumers are users of the electricity network. This article assesses whether exempting producers from contributing to the payment of the transport charges for using the electricity network is legal under European Union law. First, the relevant provisions from the Third Energy Package are examined. This legislative package does not provide strict rules with regard to the allocation of transport tariffs on the electricity market. It does however contain the principle of non-discrimination. The exact contours of this principle have not yet crystalized and it raises questions whether or not it is infringed by the producer exemptions. Secondly, the exemptions will be tested under the EU state aid doctrine. It is controversial whether or not the state aid rules are infringed by the exemption, as this will depend on the exact interpretation (broad or narrow) of the specific elements of the state aid rules. It would thus be useful that the Member States involved notify the measures to the European Commission, urging the latter to give more clarity on the legality of the producer exemption in the light of EU Law.

Western State Electricity Regulatory Commission (WSERC) was a Government Regulatory Firm in India and worked in the areas of electricity and power. Its scope of work had significantly expanded after a decade of existence and the organization needed to keep pace with the changing requirements. There was a need for agile functioning in a market driven power economy in the areas of power generation, transmission and distribution. The firm needed to transition from being a regulator to being a change agent to support the reforms in the power sector. The firm was operating with a skeletal support staff and key areas of expertise had been outsourced. The case presents the challenges of operating with an outsourced model and the need to move towards self–sufficiency. The firm wanted to now rely on internal expertise instead of depending on external consultants. The change of hiring practice would also need to be supplemented by change in the style of functioning. The case ends with the chairman pondering on how best to enable this change.

Abstract This chapter focuses on generation adequacy in Austria. It starts by outlining the current situation of the electricity market in Austria and its regulatory environment, followed by an analysis of the network reserve and its compatibility under EU rules on state aid. In January 2021, Austria introduced a regulatory framework for the establishment of a network reserve, which received approval by the European Commission in June 2021 under EU state aid rules until end of 2025. Austria has an energy-only market. The legal basis is enshrined in section 23 paragraph 2 lit 5 ElWOG 2010 (Austrian Electricity Act). Under this regulation, the control area manager has to identify congestions in transmission systems. If necessary, the control area manager must tender the conclusion of contracts with producers and other market participants under which the latter are obliged to provide congestion management services (increase or reduce their output or demand). In order to be able to participate in the tender, operators of generating plants with a capacity of more than 20 MW are obliged to notify the control area manager of any temporary, temporary seasonal and final shutdowns of their power plant.

Governments provide a wide range of services, and the digital economy provides both threats and opportunities in this sector. The Transport Accident Commission (TAC) is a compulsory, government owned and operated insurance scheme for third-party, no-fault liability insurance for transport accident victims, operated in Victoria, Australia. E-business has now been widely used in all sectors from small business (Loane, McNaughton, & Bell, 2004) to emerging economies (Li & Chang, 2004), and in very different industry sectors (Cagno, Di Giulio, & Trucco, 2004; Golden, Hughes, & Gallagher, 2003). Major steps forward and applications have occurred in retailing (Leonard & Cronan, 2003; Mackay, Altmann, & McMichael, 2003; Starr, 2003). Applications need to be highly customized as the business-to-consumer (B2C) and business-to-business (B2B) environments are very different, and requirements of industries such as retailing and mining, and indeed government, differ substantially (Carter, 2003; He & Lung, 2002; Rotondaro, 2002). Government provides a particularly different environment for e-business applications because government services are often delivered in monopoly circumstances, with no real profit motive behind them. At the height of the technology boom in October 1999, Tony Marxsen joined the TAC as head of IT to develop a new IT outsourcing contract for the organization as the current 5-year contract was due to end in July 2000. He quickly realized that the TAC IT systems were out of date, lacked IT process integration, and were constraining improvement in business processes, and that no significant investments had been made for some time. Renewing or redesigning the outsourcing contract, the basis for which he had been employed, would only be a short-term solution. The problem was that the cost of new infrastructure would be high, and return on technology investment would mainly be realized from redesigned business processes enabled by the new technology. Tony wanted to propose a business transformation, with process changes as well as significant investment in IT infrastructure. Together, these would take the TAC from 1970s technology into the 21st century. The problem was that their (investments in such transformation) payoffs are not easily and quickly achieved. Their value does not come from installing the technology; it comes from changing both operating and management processes—perhaps operating and managing cultures too. (Ross & Beath, 2002, p. 53) Tony knew he would have to win the support of the board and senior management, but he could not immediately give them a concrete business case for the investment. He also knew that any infrastructure investment had to be linked with a major process-improvement initiative from the start to avoid the double investment of building new applications to support old processes, and then undertaking major modifications or even replacement when the need for improvement became obvious to the board and management team. He compared investing in IT infrastructure to rewiring and replumbing your house: as far as visitors are concerned, there’s no visible difference, everything’s behind the walls, but as the owner you get the benefits of things like cheaper electricity and water bills because of efficiencies in the new redesigned systems. The problem is convincing people that they will get these results in the future, but that they need to hand over the money now, when there’s no hard evidence for the benefits they’ll get, just a bunch of assumptions and no guarantees. It’s a big ask for any Board. (Marxsen, personal communication, September 4, 2003) Tony knew that the first hurdle he would have to overcome would be getting the board to agree to give him the opportunity to put together a team to develop a business case for the board’s further consideration.

Metropolitan Water District (Metropolitan) is a public agency charged with providing its service area with adequate and sufficient supplies of high quality water. Metropolitan was incorporated in 1928 by an Act of the California Legislature to serve its 13 original founding Member Agencies. Today, Metropolitan provides water to 26 cities and water agencies serving more than 19 million people in six counties in Southern California. On average Metropolitan delivers 1.7 billion gallons of water per day. California, the third-largest state in the U.S. by land area, has a diverse geography including foggy coastal areas, alpine mountain ranges, hot and arid deserts, and a fertile central valley. California is also the most populous state, exceeding 37 million people in 2010. California’s large population drives the interlinked demands for water and energy in the state. The water-energy nexus in California is highlighted by the fact that two-thirds of the population resides in Southern California while two-thirds of the state’s precipitation occurs in Northern California. Separating Southern California from the rest of the state is a series of east-west trending mountain ranges. Water conveyance projects have been constructed to address this north-south water imbalance and to also import supplies from the Colorado River, hundreds of miles east of Southern California population centers. The movement of water on this scale requires significant energy resources. The California Energy Commission (CEC) estimates that water-related energy use consumes 19% of the state’s electricity and 30% of its natural gas usage every year, and demand is growing. Energy management is a critical concern to Metropolitan and other California water agencies. These issues drive water and energy leaders to jointly manage energy and water use to ensure long-term mutual benefits.

This paper describes a Demand Response (DR) pilot event performed at Sandia National Laboratories in August of 2011. This paper includes a description of the planning for the demand response event, sources of energy reduction during the event, the potential financial benefit to Sandia National Laboratories from the event, event implementation issues, and the event results. In addition, this paper presents the implications of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) Order 745, Demand Response Compensation in Organized Wholesale Energy Markets, issued in March 2011. In this order FERC mandates that demand response suppliers must be compensated by the organized wholesale energy markets at the local market price for electricity during the hour the demand response is performed. Energy management in a commercial facility can be segregated into energy efficiency and demand response. Energy efficiency focuses on steady state load minimization. Demand response reduces load for event-driven periods during the peak load. Commercial facility demand response refers to voluntary actions by customers that change their consumption of electric power in response to price signals, incentives, or directions from grid operators at times of high wholesale market prices or when electric system reliability is jeopardized. Demand-response-driven changes in electricity use are designed to be short-term and centered on critical hours during the day when demand is high or when the electricity supplier’s reserve margins are low. Demand response events are typically scheduled between 12:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m. on eight to 15 days during the hottest period of the year. Analysis has determined that automated demand response programs are more efficient and effective than manually controlled demand response programs due to persistence. FERC has stated that their Order 745 ensures organized wholesale energy market competition and removes barriers to the participation of demand response resources. In Order 745, FERC also directed that the demand response compensation costs be allocated among those customers who benefit from the lower prices for energy resulting from the demand response. FERC has allowed the organized wholesale energy markets to establish details for implementation methods for demand response compensation over the next four years following the final Order issue date. This compensation to suppliers of demand response can be significant since demand response is typically performed during those hours when the wholesale market prices are at their highest levels during the year.

Desertification is one of the major problems affecting our environment in the 21st century. Indeed, it threatens more than 1.5 million people worldwide and affects a quarter of the land in less than 100 countries, it spreads over half a billion hectares per year and reduces the surface water and groundwater. Thus, according to a report by the Food and Agriculture Organisation written in 1993, the direct and visible impacts of desertification are the damage on crops, on livestock, on the electricity productivity, etc. Indirect impacts are lack of food production, poverty, social upheaval, rural exodus to cities. In this paper, our work consists in modelling the degradation process of land whose advanced level leads to the desertification. The first step consists in assessing the degradation of land with the MEDALUS model developed by the MEDALUS project of the commission of the European Union. This model assesses desertification by its sensitivity index which is the geometric mean of four quality factor indexes of soil, vegetation, climate and management (land use). This assessment method uses the major part of the parameters influencing the land degradation process. The second step is to model the land degradation process using cellular automata (CA) approach. For that purpose, the study area will be divided into a regular grid of cells. Initially, each cell has a state (desertification sensitivity index) whose evolution at each discrete time step depends on the states of its neighbours through a built transition function. As a result, this study allows to introduce a dynamical process in MEDALUS model. Indeed, from an initial configuration of an area, the model can predict its evolution over time and space according to a continuous state transition function that extend the classical CA approach and fit to the MEDALUS model parameters.