ShareThis Page
Pa. needs to encourge development of cogeneration technology |
Local Stories

Pa. needs to encourge development of cogeneration technology

Katelyn Ferral
| Tuesday, October 7, 2014 10:51 p.m

A technology that generates electricity and thermal energy from a single fuel source and offers greater reliability, needs more attention in Pennsylvania, said the state’s top utility regulator.

The Public Utility Commission on Tuesday heard from industry experts about how Pennsylvania can benefit from combined electricity and thermal energy technology, called cogeneration. While the energy industry and policy makers are focused on the Marcellus shale boom, cogeneration should be on its radar, said commission Chairman Robert Powelson.

“This is for us as a regulatory agency, to bring these thought leaders together … and really solicit ideas about how we can harness (combined heat and power) investment here,” Powelson said.

The commission hopes to share ideas with the state Legislature, make internal changes and consider better financial incentives to encourage companies to invest in Pennsylvania projects, he said.

That would be on top of the 150 combined heat and power units operating statewide, according to the commission, including eight in Pittsburgh. Duquesne University has utilized the technology with its Combined Heat and Power Facility.

The technology allows utilities to capture more energy and offers a more reliable, cost-efficient and safe way to power buildings, especially during natural disasters like Hurricane Sandy in New Jersey, Powelson said.

During that storm, mid-Atlantic region businesses saw $15 billion to $30 billion in business interruption losses, but electric systems using combined heat and power technology were not affected, he said.

That’s electrical reliability he’d like to see Pennsylvania harness.

Other states, including New Jersey, which was hit the hardest from Sandy, have aimed to encourage companies to invest in the technology to save money.

“These costs are immense, and they don’t even include costs of lost revenue and lost productivity,” said Joseph Sullivan, vice president of energy policy at Concord Engineering Group in New Jersey. The storm affected power in 21 states and 8.1 million homes lost power, he said.

New Jersey, Maryland, Connecticut and New York have developed tax credits and grants for businesses to invest in combined heat and power projects, which require large initial investments. Expensive infrastructure costs often are the biggest challenge for companies looking to utilize the technology, panelists said.

Pennsylvania has grants for such projects, but utility companies say the process should be more transparent, streamlined and stable. The federal government offers tax incentives, but those breaks, established through legislation, are set to expire in 2016.

The technology would help the state deliver gas from Marcellus shale to the market, by lowering connection costs and allowing gas trapped in pipes to be used in new ways, said Richard Sweetser, senior technical adviser for the federal Department of Energy. “We have a lot of trapped shale gas in certain parts of the commonwealth,” Sweetser said, because the supply has outpaced the infrastructure needed to take it to markets.

Katelyn Ferral is a Trib Total Media staff writer. Reach her at 412-380-5627 or

Categories: Local stories
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.