OfReg blames CUC’s failings for blackout warnings

| 03/06/2024 | 81 Comments
CUC generator

(CNS): The Utility Regulation and Competition Office (OfReg) has rejected the idea that it is to blame for the possibility of rolling power outages on Grand Cayman this summer if, as expected, demand on the grid reaches the peak of CUC’s ability to generate electricity.

For some time, CUC has been warning that the island is facing a power crisis because OfReg has taken so long to begin a bid for utility-scale solar generation. But in a lengthy statement, the regulator’s board said CUC is not meeting its licensing obligations as a monopoly provider.

OfReg claims that since the office was established in 2017, it has never received a request from CUC for a Certificate of Need (CON) to enable it to acquire a new generator for round-the-clock power, which the board indicated must, by definition, be a diesel machine.

However, in 2017, the government implemented the National Energy Policy, which called for a transition to 70% green energy generation over the following 20 years. As a result, CUC switched its focus to green energy. This requires competitive bids, as CUC does not have a monopoly on power generation.

CUC made an offer to OfReg to build a solar farm in East End with battery storage that would cut power bills and generate a significant amount of renewable energy. However, that offer was declined as CUC’s current licence requires it to compete with other power providers for the generation of all renewables. OfReg has still not opened that bid.

CNS has asked OfReg a number of questions about the dilemma and why the competitive bid has been in the works for over two years. OfReg issued a pre-qualification invite in April 2022, but invitations to tender have still not been solicited. We are awaiting a response.

In the statement, OfReg’s board noted the difference between “firm” power (available upon demand at any time of the day) provided by CUC’s diesel generators and “non-firm” renewable generation, and stated that existing technology for solar and wind energy cannot provide round-the-clock power.

“This is not to say that large-scale renewable energy should not be a part of Cayman’s generation capacity, just that it cannot be considered ‘firm’ power in the context of the current CUC T&D Licence, which the Board is of the view needs updating.”

OfReg said that CUC should have been aware that it would need more generators in light of the ongoing construction boom and should have monitored the number and magnitude of planning permissions granted to calculate the projected load growth.

“It is therefore hard to understand how CUC could not have foreseen the significant increase in demand for electricity in the past 10 years, sufficient for it to be obligated to issue a CON,” the OfReg board stated. “CUC’s failure in that regard would therefore appear to be a fundamental breach of its obligations under its T&D Licence, which has now led to the situation that they have put themselves in.”

OfReg claimed there was no validity in CUC’s attempt to blame the regulator for not accepting its uncompetitive bid in 2019. It also said CUC’s decision to start load shedding once reserves dropped towards 35% of the peak demand was illogical, as many places around the world get by on a 5% to 10% reserve margin.

“CUC has not provided any valid explanation as to how even a precipitous dip towards the bottom of their reserve margin of 35% would automatically result in blackouts and/or CUC having to engage in load shedding,” the board said.

“Worse yet is that CUC, who despite their apparent failure to accurately forecast load growth, or at least to issue a CON, thereby requiring the OfReg to grant them two tranches of temporary generation in 2022 and 2023 in order to make up the consequent shortfall, is now saying that they have already ordered yet another 10MW of additional temporary generation.”

OfReg said that CUC had not submitted any application for additional temporary diesel generation as it claimed in its own statement last week.

The board also said that temporary generation should only be deployed in genuinely exigent circumstances as it is more expensive. The smaller machines are less efficient than the larger diesel generators that CUC has and there is a cost of leasing along with the additional fuel costs, which is passed through to their consumers. However, CUC currently has around a dozen of these smaller generators.

 OfReg accused CUC of failing to accurately calculate the projected load growth and not complying with the terms of its distribution licence, which says that the company must request permission to increase its generation three years before additional capacity is needed. “There can be no justification and certainly no basis under their current licence for CUC to seek permission for temporary generation.”

The board said it was concerned that the recent press release had left the public with the impression that OfReg had failed in some way to do its job. But the board said the regulator wants CUC to perform in accordance with the obligations in its licence so it won’t have to take steps to protect the stability of the electricity supply in Grand Cayman.

“The Board will now also consider whether and to what extent the issues raised by CUC will inform its ongoing review of CUC’s T&D Licence,” the board said.

OfReg said CUC had an obligation to meet the demand for power under its license and that last week’s release was a “tacit admission of their failure to discharge those obligations”. The board said that it was now considering “what action, if any, is appropriate for their apparent failure to perform in accordance with their licence”.

See OfReg’s full statement below:


Share your vote!


How do you feel after reading this?
  • Fascinated
  • Happy
  • Sad
  • Angry
  • Bored
  • Afraid

    

Tags: , , , ,

Category: Business, Politics, Private Sector Oversight, utilities

Comments (81)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    An employee of Ofreg told me that Gough has been fired. Anyone know if that’s true?

  2. Anonymous says:

    CUC does not differentiate with separate rate codes for Time of Use (TOU) that might provide consumers with incentive to schedule their energy consumption at off-peak times. Anywhere else, there are prime rates, mid-peak and off-peak rates, some 40% lower than prime. Most of our household appliances can be scheduled with a timer to consume power at better time, without blackouts. If CUC isn’t even going to try, then they should loose their license. Same with the cabal of consumer-exploiting telecoms billing 3x ROW rates for 3.9G/LTE from 14 years ago. We have to be advancing at the same speed as the rest of the planet, not locked in a time warp.

    18
    • Anonymous says:

      Yep, when I turn my dishwasher or washer on, I just turn it on immediately instead of a delayed start. There’s no benefit, aside from helping CUC, to adjust my power consumption: I’m still paying the same insane bill regardless of time.

  3. Anonymous says:

    psst…they friends/busom buddies….ZZZZZZ

  4. Anonymous says:

    Off regs policy appears to be at odds with the national energy policy as outlines by CIG since Offreg is refusing to classify renewables a “firm capacity” but the national energy policy states that the push is for 100% renewable energy.

    10
  5. Anonymous says:

    Over a decade ago, right here on CNS I posted about CUC prioritising profits (and dividends to shareholders) over it’s responsibility to transition to renewable energy and to upgrade or even maintain it’s ancient infrastructure, pointing out that it had clearly reached capacity and wouldn’t be able to cope with increasing population and summer temps. Some idiot, clearly trolling from CUC, made some arrogant and obnoxious reply scoffing what I said and ranting on about how world class the infrastructure was, how I clearly had no idea what I was talking about (I do actually). Since then it has only gotten worse, and exactly what I predicted has come true. But it’s not just fuel, it’s everything now, nobody seems to have any foresight, vision, real world knowledge or ability to tackle anything, particularly regulators and lawmakers.

    24
    2
    • Anonymous says:

      Over a decade ago, right here on CNS I posted about CUC prioritising profits (and dividends to shareholders) over it’s responsibility to transition to renewable energy and to upgrade or even maintain it’s ancient infrastructure, pointing out that it had clearly reached capacity and wouldn’t be able to cope with increasing population and summer temps.

      I’m not certain who you are complaining about here. CUC said they wanted to put in renewable energy, but OfReg says “wait a minute, we promised someone they would get a diesel generator contract”.

      What happens when/if someone other than CUC gets a contract to generate electricity with diesel generators?

      We get a new diesel-generating plant site with noise and environmental pollution. What is the payback period before the overall project is profitable?

      Does OfReg tell us we have to continue purchasing power generated by diesel because the new plant cannot be shutdown because they have been given a 20-year contract?

      Or will it be like the USA where farmers get paid not to plant crops when there is an over abundance of corn already stored in silos?

      It would probably be very profitable to have a contract to generate 20 megawatts of electricity with a diesel generator, and after 5 years be told that you have to shut it down to comply with the percentage of electricity being generated by renewable energy, but you still get paid for another 15 years without having to produce anything.

      So may questions, and only stupid answers.

      6
      7
      • Anonymous says:

        My point back then was to CUC, that investment should be in renewables, not more diesel generators. The point is that this is something OfReg ought to be saying too. It’s like one big magic roundabout these days and everybody’s jumping on the bandwagon it seems.

    • Anonymous says:

      CMR = Media Mafia
      You don’t pay her and she’ll attempt to bring you down.
      Pay her and she’ll sing your praises.

  6. Frank says:

    Well you know quite frankly people say they wish Cayman could go back in time to the simple good old days of fishing no electricity before all this money and expats came on island. Think outside the box these power outages are a time to be one with nature. CUC see you see for you and me happy and free don’t need no electricity just a fire and shade under a tree

    3
    4
  7. Anonymous says:

    Nobody is talking about CUC’s bid to continue it’s monopolistic hold over Grand Cayman

    8
    6
  8. Anonymous says:

    CUC aint even a thing to me anymore. What about the Supermarkets and gas stations which are upping prices on a monthly basis by 10-12-15-20% how is this even possible. The Government of the Cayman Islands has become one that doesn’t care about its people. We need to change their salaries all back $5K monthly. Let them see what its like for us.

    32
  9. Anonymous says:

    a local company proposed to install a device behind your cuc meter that would allow you to safely connect a generator to power your home whenever there was a power failure (remember hurricane Ivan?) CUC promptly shot it down because they fear people would just run a generator full time and not use cuc power. our government allowed that to happen. cuc interest overrides everybody.

    26
    5
    • Anonymous says:

      Yes, this is true. CIG could change the law to allow competition and us to actually bank our solar while still using the grid when needed. This is all on CIG.

      13
      1
      • Anonymous says:

        How do you propose solar be banked? If it’s with batteries, are you going to pay for those batteries so they can store your “banked” energy to use at another time?

        3
        4
        • Anonymous says:

          Uhh – yes! That’s the way it normally works. And at the price of electricity in Cayman makes sense. But CUC doesn’t want you to be independent and still have a CUC connection for bad weather or overnight – despite all the whining about peak demand. Duty break on lithium batteries and allowing people a connection would allow those homes and businesses with large solar banks to reduce their demands on the grid.

          • Anonymous says:

            Batteries for this purpose are duty free already…

            There is availability to connect solar and storage to the grid right now (and save more money if you store the energy to use during peak period)…

            Any other solutions that are already in place that you would like to raise as problems?

        • Anonymous says:

          In short, yes, or you can release it to the grid at night.

    • Anonymous says:

      We put one in anyway. It’s an easy install.

    • Anonymous says:

      It’s called a ‘Transfer Switch’ and readily available for installations / system upgrades on old or new builds, both residential & commercial.

      No conspiracy here on a ‘ Magic’ device hidden behind the meter.

  10. Anonymous says:

    I want to know why a person who have the means to run their home off grid solely on solar/geothermal, etc.. if everything is up to code. this is a massive failure of our leadership.

    16
    1
    • Anonymous says:

      You can as long as the home does NOT have a connection to the grid. As a fellow consumer, I do not wish to pay for your infrastructure and possible load on the off chance you MAY need to use it when your maintenance or equipment is suspect.

      8
      12
      • Anonymous says:

        You’re an idiot. Being connected to the grid to use energy when needed still requires payment to cuc for consumption, no matter how many panels are on my roof.

        11
        1
  11. Anonymous says:

    Bury the damn powerlines.

    20
    1
  12. SSM345 says:

    OffReg = No Accountability.

    CUC = No Accountability.

    Cayman Public pays the price.

    26
    • Anonymous says:

      …I like things in threes….so, if you don’t mind, I’ll add:

      “CIG = No Accountabilty.”

      just before:

      “Cayman Public pays the price”

      11
      1
    • Anonymous says:

      You missed:

      CIG: No accountability
      Politicians: No accountability

      8
      1
  13. Anonymous says:

    Meanwhile Cayman Water continues to suppy water under an expired licence. OfReg has done nothing about this. Cayman Water’s holding company which is listed in New York has this fact disclosed in their stock exhange filings. One can assume CIG Cabinet is also aware.

    27
    • Anonymous says:

      The problem lies with Water Authority being the regulator (licensor). When OfReg entered the fray as regulator of water utilities the Water Authority should have ceased to become a regulator and itself become a licensee and its regulatory responsibilities and associated staff rolled into OfReg. The other solution is for Water Authority to cease selling water as selling water and being a regulator of its own product is a serious conflict.

      4
      9
  14. Anonymous says:

    Glad ofreg is finally telling the public what is really going on. Cmr is obviously being paid to protect CUC but this is not like the nonsense politics she usually spouts and fools people with it’s black and white in a written agreement. You can’t pull the wool over everyone’s eyes all the time.

    29
    7
  15. Anonymous says:

    Ofreg has done nothing to address the issue of eye-watering, extortionate fuel prices in Cayman, even though this is part of their mandate. Considering that international oil, and fuel prices in the US have been steadily decreasing for the last 18 months. I am literally dying of terminal disappointment here…

    So, I am sorry, but I cannot take anything Ofreg have to say seriously.

    49
    • Anonymous says:

      Not just price, but quality of the fuel. Retail franchise operators are allowed to cut the fuel with their own additives.

  16. Anonymous says:

    One simply had to listen to a certain talk show this morning to understand why “journalists” should be held to a certain standard and be made to declare conflicts of interest.

    The host was clearly not interested in truth or facts; she was only out to rep her client and promote their agenda. It was so obvious that she was only willing to entertain conversations that was critical of the regulator. She told anyone seeking to educate the public or proffer a contradicting view to “leave me there” while she proceeded to speak nonsense about the length of paragraphs in a press release.

    The host’s attempt to justify the unjustifiable by digging up irrelevant historical gibberish was a clear manipulation of the truth. The responsibility for the risk of rolling blackouts lies solely with CUC, not OfReg as she tried to imply. They failed to ensure adequate reserves and redundancy, and now they are trying to shift the blame to OfReg, a convenient scapegoat.

    As a media house and a journalist, one should uphold the public’s reasonable expectation of objectivity and factual reporting. The audience deserves better than the biased and misleading information presented by the host. It’s time to demand a higher standard in journalism.

    57
    1
    • Anonymous says:

      On point! I couldn’t even stand to listen to her anymore, it was a clear propaganda campaign and it’s not responsible journalism when it’s obvious that you support whomever funds you to fight on their side. I hope people remember that when she talks “politics” as well.

      40
      1
      • Anonymous says:

        It was obvious from last election. That was her big break!

        15
        1
      • Anonymous says:

        You got that right. Nothing bothers me more than hearing Sandra speak out of 100% ignorance and talk about how uneducated other people are. That woman is an absolute unmitigated moron.

        35
        • Anonymous says:

          The biggest fools are the people who listen to her and the biggest crooks are those who pay her to spout their lies.

          16
          • Anonymous says:

            She really fools a lot of the simple people into believing she’s smart or neutral. Sad

            10
            • Anonymous says:

              When I see that some of my friends actually follow and listen to her sorry shows, reminds me why we don’t hang out as often anymore.

              • Anonymous says:

                Don’t be so quick to judge. For a long time they’ve been the preferred traffic alert for daily commuters!

      • Anonymous says:

        Maybe she started out as a “voice for the people” but those days are long gone. Its a voice for the highest bidder now it appears.

        29
      • Anonymous says:

        She also denied repping HSA too, another misrepresentation that can easily be proven with an FOI.

        Just ask the hospital for a copy of any contracts between the HSA and CMR since 2020 and you will catch her in that lie.

        She is just a paid piper that will play whatever tune those who are paying her instructs her to play.

        24
        1
        • Anonymous says:

          I hear there are others paying her too – is it true that Ucci cut her a cheque!

          • Anonymous says:

            Do what she does, send the FOI to the Cabinet Office asking all government agencies to respond. Public funds should not be used to fuel gossip media. I can only imagine the drop in GDP from people wasting 3 hours per workday listening to nonsense.

    • Anonymous says:

      What a very sad place to find yourself in?
      Journalism is supposed to be the delivery of truth to a trusting public which is obviously a measure of personal integrity.

  17. Anonymous says:

    The real proof of OfReg’s effectiveness will be in its response or inaction against CUC. Either way there is now no short term solution as temporary generators will push rates higher. I would not be in the least bit surprised if CUC imminently submits to OfReg for a rate increase from having to install temporary generators as a stop gap measure.
    Currently It’s the situation is shaping up to be like a Mexican standoff with members of old boys club on both sides. Consumers again are left between a rock and a hard place.
    CUC’s licence terms need to be amended immediately so as to mitigate its stranglehold on any and all renewable power generation.

    20
    1
    • Anonymous says:

      OFREG DOES NOTHING for Brackers, Gasoline and Brac Power 0& Light are both duty free and yet its more expensive to consumers than Grand that has to pay high duties to Government.

      • Anonymous says:

        Weird. It’s almost like small markets mean you can’t spread high infrastructure overheads to reduce costs through economies of scale…

  18. Anonymous says:

    When is Government going to admit that OfReg as it now stands is a complete failure and a total waste of public funds?

    Close it down and start all over again!

    27
    3
  19. Anonymous says:

    I don’t know whether it’s sad or funny that OfReg seems to think the only way forward is to get more diesel generators, but that CUC is trying to move toward solar.
    I also don’t know whether it’s sad or funny that CREA has been pushing support for OfReg’s recent press release given the above, despite being bad for the RE part of CREA.
    It’s almost like we’re in upside-down world at the moment!

    19
    1
  20. Anonymous says:

    Wonder who is telling the truth here. Hopefully the correspondence relating to the applications will be made public.

    15
  21. Anonymous says:

    Just what Cayman needs. The monopoly provider and pretend regulator in a spat with nothing getting done and the consumer base suffering the consequences.

    Does Cayman really have to be managed as if it’s the Titanic?

    27
  22. Anonymous says:

    OffReg is not fit for purpose. CUC is not much better.

    23
    • Anonymous says:

      Nobody has been conditioned to fear regulators of any kind in the Cayman Islands. For that, they would need to show up regularly, or sometimes unannounced, and actually know what they were looking at. ie Competence.

    • Anonymous says:

      2;08 pm, shut down OFreg people will not even know its shut down, SHUT DOWN CUC and we all be Crying big time Caynan would be finished. That’s the difference of the 2.

      2
      2
  23. Anonymous says:

    We didn’t need CUC letter to know OfReg is not doing their job. As a regulator of a monopoly, may be you to should also be keeping track of the pace of construction and CUC capacity as well.

    21
    1
  24. Anonymous says:

    I couldn’t care less about the blame game.

    I just need the people sitting on their hands, or using their fingers to point blame, to actually do something useful instead.

    17
  25. Anonymous says:

    Here we go with the finger pointing ! can you two act responsibly and work on a solution , that’s the only thing that will matter and work on lowering the cost while at it that’s really important too

    10
  26. Anonymous says:

    OfReg just another government disaster.

    15
  27. Anonymous says:

    As CNS has flagged here, the key issue seems to be when can Grand Cayman get competitively-bid, utility-scale solar energy generation and battery storage?

    At this point, the use of additional diesel is a stop-gap; hence logical to lease temporary diesel.

    Respectfully, please can OfReg announce to the public a firm timeline for when the utility solar auction described by the Compass in July 2022, and covered here by CNS, is to be completed? And, clarify if that also includes battery storage? Link to the article is below at [1].

    Costs, in ascending order:

    • Utility scale solar: US$0.10/kWh – global weighted average levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for new projects commissioned in 2017. Source: OfReg 2018 report, citing International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA) report. [2]

    • Cayman potential utility scale solar: [US$] 0.10/kWh, or less. Source: CUC press release, April 2024. [3]

    • Cayman roof-top solar, current CORE* rate: CI$0.15-0.175/kWh – for installations of > 5-10 kW, and <= 5 kW, respectively. *CORE = Consumer-Owned Renewable Energy. Source: CUC CORE agreement as of July 2023

    • Bodden Town 5MW solar plant, started June 2017: CI$0.16/kWh – projected LCOE over 25 year life of power purchase agreement. Source: OfReg 2018 report. [2]

    • Cayman diesel: [US$] 0.19/kWh – current average cost. Source: CUC press release, April 2024. [3].

    • Cayman roof-top solar, April 2015 CORE rate: CI$0.32/kWh – for residential customers. Source: CUC CORE Credit Agreement, Revised April 1, 2015.

    Other findings:

    • “By CUC’s estimation, covering every roof of every building will only contribute a maximum of 25% of Grand Cayman’s energy needs". CUC press release, April 2024. [3]

    • The potential 23 MW solar plant that the July 2022 Compass article referenced, would be nearly 5x the size of the existing Bodden Town plant. The latter took (only) 4 months to build and bring online. Construction started Feb 2017. Full commercial operation Jun 2017. OfReg 2018 report. [2]

    • A 23 MW solar plant would represent a 14% increase in generating capacity, relative to CUC's 166 MW of installed capacity. CUC, 1Q24 Results [4].

    • A potential benefit of increasing Cayman's utility solar in stages, is that it will hopefully capture further reductions in the costs of solar equipment and advances in battery technology. Note the cost reductions between CORE 2015 (CI$0.32/kWh) and CORE July 2023 (CI$0.15-0.175/kWh), and the cost of the Bodden Town plant (CI$0.16/kWh)compared to current projected utility solar ([US$]0.10/kWh).

    • A 23 MW solar plus storage plant could save CUC customers approximately US$10 million per year. [3]. That equates to nearly US$300 per customer per year, though each individual customer's savings will depend on their level of electricity consumption. CUC had 33,777 customers at March 2024. [4].

    The longer we delay, the more we pay.

    Not my circle of competence. Happy to be corrected. I would like to see our path to lower electricity costs.

    Disclosure: CUC residential customer. Otherwise, no vested interest in any of the parties mentioned, nor any bidders if in fact an auction is in progress.

    [1] Compass. "Solar power auction proceeding without government involvement; Plan for public ownership not finalised". July 6, 2022. https://www.caymancompass.com/2022/07/06/solar-power-auction-proceeding-without-government-involvement/

    [2] OfReg. Entropy 5-MW Solar PV [Photo-Voltaic] Post Project Review. Prepared by Gregg Anderson. 10/2/18. https://www.ofreg.ky/viewPDF/documents/energy-publications/2021-05-12-03-12-37-Entropy5-MWSolarPVPostProjectReviewI1539704567.pdf

    [3] CUC. "on Misinformation Surrounding Renewable Energy in the Cayman Islands". April 12, 2024. https://www.cuc-cayman.com/fronthome/download_pdf?file=1712937840cuc_statement_misinformation_renewable_energy_120424.pdf

    [4] CUC. "CUC Announces 2024 First Quarter Results and Strategic Milestones". May 2, 2024. https://www.cuc-cayman.com/fronthome/download_pdf?file=1714654325cuc_1st_quarter_2024_results_010524.pdf

    15
    • Anonymous says:

      Meanwhile, CUC’s Zefnet EV power supply points (the few that work) = KYD$0.386 per KWH

      Consumers aren’t offered any price differential between peak, mid-peak, or off-peak rates.

      • Anonymous says:

        A little research suggests that since June 2018, CUC has offered an EV-specific charge rate to Residential customers of $0.1077/kWh, with an on-peak surcharge of $0.02913 and an off-peak credit of -0.03954. [1]

        It looks like the Zefnet charging stations are a partnership between CUC and ZEF Energy, where ZEF is providing the hardware and software.

        I suspect the added cost is in part compensation to ZEF, and in part a premium for the convenience and the extra resources (including installation costs) that supports it.

        [1] CUC. “Electric Vehicle Charging Rates: Terms of Service (June 2018)”. https://www.cuc-cayman.com/otherpdf/download_pdf?file=1549041054Electric_Vehicle_Charging_Rates_Terms_of_Service_Final.pdf

  28. Anonymous says:

    nobody looks good on this one. However Ofreg is telling a very different story than CUC so we need to get to the bottom of that.

    Ofreg is 100% that threatening load shedding blackouts when reserve margin is in the 30% range is a straight up scare tactic on behalf of CUC. So no matter what shakes out of the rest of this, they’ve screwed up at least that part.

    I also don’t understand how CUC wants to pin the blame of a solar bid and comingle that with not having enough reserve firm power. That seems to be pretty clear that solar has nothing to do with their need to provide firm capacity.

    18
    2
    • Anonymous says:

      I think the point was that solar plus storage could contribute to capacity, without being traditional “firm capacity.” Otherwise, we’ll end up with a whole lot of generators that don’t actually get used when we reach 2045 and the NEP calls for 100% of energy to be from renewable energy. So if a bid for a combined solar and storage project can help meet capacity needs, not having that move forward for multiple years would mean that its contribution to capacity never materialized as may have been anticipated.

      On the reserve margin and load shedding, it’s probably somewhere in the middle. If you read both articles, CUC says there is higher risk of load shedding, whereas OfReg states they don’t understand why load shedding will definitely occur with reserve margins. I think the answer we all seek requires clarification from both of them. The whole point of reserve margins for utilities is to cover the risk of unavailability, whether for scheduled maintenance or for unexpected issues. That way, even if a generator is out of service, you have enough extra that mostly covers that risk. It’s not the same as no risk, because you could have multiple generators out of service simultaneously. Since we’re the ones who have to prepare for what this might mean over the summer with our home power supply, I think it would be helpful to better understand what our risks look like.

      13
      • Anonymous says:

        Yeah but there’s a big difference between the NEP and the license agreement already in place. One is for a goal of 100% renewables in 20 years, while we currently have about 3%. The other is the standing agreement that CUC has to abide by legally….now.

        • Anonymous says:

          It also calls for 30% by 2030 (only 6 years from now), 70% by 2037 (13 years from now) and all of these types of generating equipment typically have lifespans of longer than the 21 years to 2045. We need to start now, and be careful that we don’t put more money than is minimally necessary into equipment with a clear sunset date (because we all know we will pay for it, whether it is allowed to be used or not).

    • Anonymous says:

      Respectfully, CUC’s press release [1] didn’t say that it would start load shedding if the reserve margin was breached.

      What it said was: “While the Company and its dedicated operations and maintenance teams are working very hard to keep all generating units available, if on any occasion, customer demand is higher than available generating capacity available, the Company will need to conduct rotating customer outages, known as load shedding.”

      Note the part, “higher than available generating capacity available”.

      I was troubled by the part of OfReg’s statement that read: “As far as we can ascertain from CUC’s recent press release” [2]. This suggests that nobody picked up a phone to clarify the situation.

      Disclosure: CUC residential customer. Otherwise, no vested interest in any of the parties mentioned, nor any bidders if in fact an auction is in progress.

      [1] CUC. “CUC Addresses Generation Capacity and Increased Risk of Load-Shedding Amidst Rising Energy Demand in Grand Cayman”. May 27, 2024. https://www.cuc-cayman.com/fronthome/download_pdf?file=1716905715cuc_addresses_generation_capacity_270524.pdf

      [2] OfReg. “OfReg Board’s Response to CUC’s Press Release on Power Shedding”. May 31, 2024. https://www.ofreg.ky/news/ofreg-board-s-response-to-cuc-s-press-release-on-power-shedding

      9
      1
  29. Anonymous says:

    Lots of finger-pointing between CUC and OfReg. Regardless of who is at fault – our current Govt administration shares responsibility. I expect that power blackouts will be just one of several consequences of unchecked population growth going forward.

    23

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.