Jim Rossi

Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Research, Florida State University College of Law

Jim Rossi is the Harry M. Walborsky Professor of Law and Associate Dean for Research at Florida State University College of Law. Before entering academia, Professor Rossi practiced energy law in Washington, D.C., working with consumer, public power, and independent power producer groups. He continues to serve as a governmental and industry consultant on electric power. He has published Energy Economics and the Environment (with Fred Bosselman, Joel Eisen, David Spence and Jacqueline Lang Weaver) (second edition, Foundation Press 2006), the leading casebook on energy law. He also has written a case study of regulatory change in the electric power industry, Regulatory Bargaining and Public Law (Cambridge University Press 2005). In addition to teaching administrative and energy law at Florida State University, Professor Rossi has taught energy law courses at the University of Texas Law School, Vanderbilt Law School, and the University of North Carolina School of Law.

Find publications by Professor Jim Rossi here.


Notes on presentation: (10.2.2007)


Nuclear & coal how low capacity factors – lots have high capacity factors – some sources are better than others in baseload generation and others have better function for peak load generation.

Range of costs :
CA energy commission. Levelized cost per kw hour – basically the average of fixed and veriable - costs on chart –

GE has a massive solar thermal in Mojave dessert – 15.5

Serious difference in risk in generating power. Conventional sources like coal use as much as 75% of costs of plant in fuel costs. Up front costs low –“it’s a bit like a Vegas marriage – deceptive over time because the fuel costs & other costs are hidden - up front cheap but other costs over time are hidden. – they show up later in life.

Solar, wind, - significant up front fixed costs, like nuclear and the hidden costs aren’t there the same way as with more conventional fuels. (Can be other hidden costs)

FPL – claims solar thermal can serve baseload capacity. Not panels attached to your roof. It’s much larger scale technology that you use to concentrate solar power through panels that follow the sun – with oil or water that store energy or generate steam & run turbines respectively. Interesting technology, 1.5 billion for 300 mw plant. – about 5,000 per KW in contrast to 2- 3000 a KW with conventional – even more expensive than nuclear plant. Once fully operational, 200,000 homes – to break even – a 10cents KW hour number to meet to do it efficiency. CA best case now is 14 15 cents a range to make it work. Some promise to exploit solar for baseload. If can store for as much as 16 hours, may be able to use for baseload – explored for German and other European countries.

In Florida – might expect solar to have a lot of potential here – solar availability is most significant in southwest US generating about 8.5 KW/day. On the southern tip of Florida it’s 7.5 KW hr/day, but moving north, not as much – forests wetlands – hard to exploit in northern part of Florida.

**STORAGE*** keep in mind. Disadvantage for solar.

A lot of this is new technology and hasn’t been tested commercially. Interesting if can make them work. FP&L is taking a bet that the technology will pay off. – 10 mw pilot plant to begin, then go to 300 mw. It has to become that big to be competitive.

354 MW solar thermal plant in Mojave occupies 1,000 acres – need a massive amount of land. Has to be land without trees and can’t have significant environmental resources.

To make costs feasible – have to locate facility close to urban customer base – at least 2-300,000 residents. There have to be significant state and local tax incentives – shared ownership of finance structures – incentives for investors.

Demand:
No matter how efficient we can make apparatus – we need to make people more aware.
- Smart metering, etc – ways to make customers aware of what they’re using, where and what it’s costing them. When you’re on a diet – check your calories, pay attention to what you’re eating. Smart metering will help us do that.

In California, since 1974 has held per capita use constant and the rest of country has jumped 50% - may be because the costs are high. Folks don’t look with envy at California’s high costs. But we can begin to exploit price differential - not only to give incentives for individual conservation, can use to subsidize different kinds of technologies and supply options – concerns – low rates in neighboring states. It is important for Florida to stay competitive economically. Many customer bases that have inelastic demand – like residential customers and some commercial customers.

One final point:

Hard to separate generation from everything else – federal level competitive wholesale markets and at some level in these markets transmission and generation can serve as substitutes for one another. If transmission costs are low, can give us opportunities in generation. Can transmission help us leverage our generation options? Midwest – wind power thriving – because it has been approached from a transmission angle, not just generation angle. This is a golden opportunity for Florida.