photo by: Mike Yoder/Journal-World File Photo

A flock of birds glides over a field east of Evergy's Lawrence Energy Center in this file photo.

Last year’s arctic blast sure didn’t seem to discriminate between Lawrence and Kansas City. I think there were freezing pipes, dangerous wind chills, and people dreaming of trading their polar bear parkas for tropical beachwear in both locations.

But the aftereffects of that historic storm sure are discriminating between the two cities, at least in one instance. Evergy, the state’s largest electric utility, is in the process of trying to recoup hundreds of millions of dollars of expenses that the storm added to its operations. The plan it has presented to regulators calls for places like Lawrence and many other cities across the state to pay extra on their bills for two years, while customers in the Kansas City metro area actually will get a credit on their bills.

If you have forgotten last year’s arctic blast, weather from the last couple of days should have reminded you. Last year’s arctic blast also was in February. (By the way, I vote that we eat Valentine’s chocolate in January and cancel February from here on out.) In addition to bitter temperatures, the two-week cold snap produced natural gas prices that were historically high. In some cases, natural gas prices were so high that gas utilities were paying in one month what they normally would spend on gas for four years.

We’ve been reporting for months now how gas utilities — like Black Hills Energy — have been planning to recoup their costs from that arctic blast. In Lawrence, residential customers of Black Hills Energy are scheduled to pay an extra $11.47 per month on their bills for the next five years.

That’s gotten plenty of attention, but people perhaps have forgotten that there also is a price to pay on your electric bill since much electricity is generated using natural gas. Well, there may be, depending on where you live.

The good news is that the amount Evergy is hoping to add to Lawrence bills will be quite a bit less than the $11.47 per month that state regulators recently approved for Black Hills. Evergy’s proposal before the Kansas Corporation Commission envisions a $3.10 per month charge for residential customers for the next two years.

What’s more interesting is what is proposed to happen in Kansas City. Customers in the Kansas City metro area are scheduled to get a $6.82 per month credit on their bills as a result of last year’s arctic blast.

Why?

Essentially because the power plants that serve the Kansas City metro area made enough excess electricity during the arctic blast, and were able to sell that electricity at high enough rates to other power-starved utilities, that Evergy made more money off those plants than they normally would have made during that period. Since utilities are regulated entities, Evergy can’t simply pocket those unexpected profits. Instead, regulators will require that they be shared with utility customers.

But not all of Evergy’s utility customers. That’s because Evergy is basically a combination of two older electric utilities — Westar Energy and Kansas City Power & Light. As a result, there are still rates and cost structures that exist for the old Westar territory — which includes Lawrence — that are different than the rates and cost structures that exist for the old KCP&L territory in Kansas City, a spokeswoman with Evergy told me.

In the case of this arctic blast, the cost structure in the old KCP&L territory performed better than the old Westar structure, likely because the KCP&L plants are less reliant on natural gas as a fuel source.

In fact, officials with Kansas’ Citizens’ Utility Ratepayer Board did some research and found that of the 33 utilities that are located in the Southwest Power Pool — a big district that includes parts of Kansas, Oklahoma, Texas, Arkansas and Louisiana — the old KCP&L territory had the lowest fuel costs. The old Westar territory didn’t perform terribly, either. It had the 11th lowest fuel costs, CURB said in documents filed with state regulators.

As a result, CURB — which is tasked with advocating for the interests of utility consumers — is largely supportive of Evergy’s plan to add the $3.10 per month onto the bills. CURB in its filing with state regulators said it was “just and reasonable” for Evergy to recover those costs from customers, generally praising the work that Evergy did to keep the lights on during the arctic blast.

CURB’s concerns are more related to limiting any future costs. CURB expressed concerns that state regulators may place new regulations on Evergy to deal with future arctic blast events, such as adding new types of de-icing technology for wind turbines or new ways to protect coal piles from freezing. Those new technologies or practices would come at a cost that ultimately would be passed along to ratepayers. CURB officials aren’t yet sure those new practices are necessary.

“CURB is concerned with possible overreaction to this event,” it said in its filing to the KCC.

Officials expressed concerns that new, costly regulations might be implemented to deal with a weather event that still is relatively rare. That argument may produce an interesting debate with people who say climate change will make these type of severe weather events more likely.

We’ll watch how that plays out. Regardless, though, Evergy customers in the Lawrence area probably should plan for an extra charge on their bills for a while. The KCC will be considering final approval of the plan in the next month or so.

In the meantime, here’s a potential strategy to deal with those extra costs: The next time you go out with some Kansas City friends, insist that they pick up the tab.