Capacity deficits are projected [over the next 10 years] in areas where future generator retirements are expected before enough replacement resources are in service to meet rising demand forecasts. Energy risks are projected in areas where the future resource mix could fail to deliver the necessary supply of electricity under energy-constrained conditions. For example, subfreezing temperatures can create energy-limiting conditions by disrupting the natural gas fuel supplies to generators, leading to fuel-related derates or outages and potentially insufficient electricity supply. Electricity peak demand and energy growth forecasts over the 10-year assessment period are higher than at any point in the past decade. Since the 2022 LTRA, peak season CAGR has risen in nearly all assessment areas, contributing to an overall trend to lower reserve margins. Some of the sharpest peak demand forecast increases and growth rates can be seen in winter seasons as heating system and transportation electrification influence forecasts.
- Date Posted:
- January 3, 2024
This note responds to an article by Gale, Sabelhaus, and Thorpe (GST) recently posted that comments on Auten and Splinter. GST discuss levels and trends of top income shares in AS and Piketty, Saez, and Zucman. The GST analysis, however, fails to include relevant context and misrepresents some AS results. In contrast to eight points raised or implied in GST, this note explains that: (1) GST misrepresent how different approaches in AS and PSZ explain top 1% gaps and fail to discuss the reasons for those different approaches, (2) the AS estimates are consistent with other high-quality inequality studies, (3) GST ignore crucial differences between survey and tax data when considering the distribution of underreporting in tax data, (4) GST ignore the results of special audit studies that find significantly higher misreporting rates among those with negative reported incomes or in the bottom 99% relative to the top 1%, (5) the suggested limitations of the audit studies are unsubstantiated or have little impact, (6) AS presented estimates with alternative allocations of government consumption, (7) the AS allocation of deficits is more consistent with historical precedent, and (8) the implication that AS estimates are inconsistent with financial wealth inequality trends is incorrect.