MOPR reconsidered: Competitive generators move away from FERC’s PJM order, toward carbon pricing
“The [MOPR expansion] policy has no economic foundation — price controls never ‘fix’ subsidies — and it’s painted merchants as the political villain,” Devin Hartman, director of energy and environmental policy at free market think tank R Street Institute, said in an email. Merchant generators “need to turn political angst against subsidies and towards embracing their core business model: market competition.”
…
“A graceful transition from MOPR is imperative for the long-term political support of independent power generation,” said Hartman. “MOPR is not only causing states to rethink their participation in organized markets, but it’s deterring stakeholders in the West and Southeast from forming an RTO.”
…
Hartman says that Cricket Valley and Empire’s pursuit of a MOPR expansion is a sign of the potential long-lasting harm of FERC’s December decision.
“MOPR in PJM was always a gateway drug to other mechanisms and markets,” he said. “It delineates the consequences of FERC playing a deferential role to regional stakeholders in building a record for major precedent setting. … Now interests outside of PJM fight an uphill battle to counteract a damaging precedent they had no initial say on.”
