Pipes & Wires

INSIGHT AND ANALYSIS OF COOL ENERGY & INFRASTRUCTURE STUFF

Issue 147 – November 2015

From the editor’s desk…

Welcome to Pipes & Wires #147. This issue begins with several gas and electricity regulatory determinations in New Zealand and Australia, and then examines a new twist to a big merger in the US. We then examine some solar and renewable issues, and then examine the possibility of nuclear power in Australia. This issue ends with a discussion of the move toward demand-based tariffs in Australia.

Blast from the past…

Step back to the early 1930’s with this video of the construction and operation of Battersea Power Station and then fast forward to 30^th March 1937 to read all about it in Part 5 of Wonders Of World Engineering. Interesting to note that acid rain and particulate emissions from burning coal were well recognised 85 years ago.

Regulatory decisions

NZ – gas under pressure

Introduction

The Commerce Commission recently released its cost of capital decision for Powerco’s gas distribution business for the 2016 information disclosure year. This article examines the key features of that determination.

Regulatory framework

The regulatory framework is set out s2.4 of the Gas Distribution Services Input Methodologies Determination 2012, whilst the wider framework for setting WACC’s is s52T of the Commerce Act 1986 which sets out the matters covered by the Input Methodologies.

Key features of the gas distribution WACC’s

Key features of the gas distribution WACC’s include…

	25^th percentile	Mid-point	75^th percentile
Vanilla WACC	5.45%	6.26%	7.07%
Post-tax WACC	4.88%	5.69%	6.50%

NZ - previous WACC decisions

Some of the Commissions’ previous WACC decisions are as follows.

WACC decision applies to	Approx date	Mid-point WACC	75^th (or 67^th) percentile WACC
Powerco gas distribution for 2016 disclosure year.	October 2015	Vanilla 6.26%, post-tax 5.69%.	Vanilla 7.07%, post-tax 6.5%.
Vector and Powerco gas pipelines for year ending 30^th June 2016.	July 2015	Vanilla 6.65%.	Vanilla 75^th percentile 7.46%.
Transpower for year ending 30^th June 2016	July 2015	Vanilla 5.95%.	Vanilla 67^th percentile 6.41%.
Maui CPP application before June 2016	June 2015	Vanilla 6.63% to 6.71%.	Vanilla 67^th percentile 7.16% to 7.23%.
All electricity distribution for year starting on 1^st April 2015.	April 2015	Vanilla 6.02%, post-tax 5.37%.	Vanilla 6.49%, post-tax 5.84%.
Wellington Airport for year starting on 1^st April 2015.	April 2015	Vanilla 6.93%, post-tax 6.71%.	Vanilla 7.91%, post-tax 7.69%.
Powerco gas CPP application before April 2016.	March 2015	Vanilla 6.70% to 6.72%.	Vanilla 7.23% to 7.25%.
Maui Developments for 2016 disclosure year	January 2015	Vanilla 7.08%.	Vanilla 7.89%.
Vector, GasNet CPP application before December 2015.	December 2014	Vanilla 7.11%, 7.14%, 7.22%.
All electricity CPP applications after 30^th September 2014.	September 2014	Vanilla 6.58%, 6.64%, 6.72%.
Auckland, Christchurch Airports for 2015 disclosure year.	July 2014	Vanilla 7.64%.	Vanilla 8.63%.
Vector, GasNet for 2015 disclosure year.	July 2014	Vanilla 7.54%.	Vanilla 8.35%.
Transpower for 2015 disclosure year.	July 2014	Vanilla 6.83%.	Vanilla 7.55%.
Wellington Airport for 2015 disclosure year.	April 2014	Vanilla 7.70%.
EDB’s for 2015 disclosure year.	April 2014	Vanilla 6.89%.
Powerco gas CPP applications before March 2015.	March 2014	Vanilla 5-year 7.54%.	Vanilla 5-year 8.35%.
Maui pipeline (gas transmission).	January 2014	Vanilla 7.64%, post-tax 6.85%.
Vector, GasNet CPP applications before December 2014.	December 2013	Vanilla 7.56%.
All CPP applications before 30^th September 2014	September 2013	Vanilla from 6.26% to 6.69%.	Vanilla from 6.97% to 7.41%.
Transpower	July 2013		Vanilla 6.85%, post-tax 6.17%.
Vector gas distribution, GasNet	July 2013		Vanilla 7.65%, post-tax 6.97%.
Auckland & Christchurch airports	July 2013		Vanilla 8.00%, post-tax 7.75%.
All electricity distribution	April 2013		Vanilla 6.83%, post-tax 6.14%.
Maui pipeline (gas transmission)	February 2013		Vanilla 7.46%, post-tax 6.80%.
All gas distribution and gas transmission DPP’s	December 2012		Vanilla 6.63%.
Vector, GasNet CPP’s	December 2012	Vanilla 6.39% (5 years).
Powerco gas distribution	October 2012	Vanilla 6.83%, post-tax 6.12%.

Aus – gas under pressure in South Australia

Introduction

Australian Gas Networks (AGN) recently submitted its Access Arrangement Information (rate case) to the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) for its South Australian gas distribution networks for the 5 year control period starting on 1^st July 2016. This article examines that Access Arrangement to set some context for the AER’s impending determinations.

A bit about AGN

AGN operates gas networks nationally that supply about 1,185,000 customers through 23,000km of distribution pipelines and 1,124km of transmission pipelines. The subject of this article is AGN’s South Australian network which is mainly in the Adelaide metro area.

Regulatory framework

The basis of the regulatory framework is the National Gas (South Australia) Act 2008, which sets out the National Gas Law as a Schedule to the Act. Section 26 of the Act provides for the National Gas Rules to have legal effect, and it is those Rules that set the detailed regulatory framework.

Key features of the process to date

Key features of the process to date include…

Parameter	Access Arrangement	Draft determination	Revised AA	Final determination
OpEx	$353m
CapEx	$699m
Opening RAB	$1,429m
Return on equity	9.91%
Return on debt	5.44%
Revenue	$1,149m

Pipes & Wires will comment further as the AER releases its draft determination.

Aus – gas under pressure in the Capital

Introduction

ActewAGL recently submitted its Access Arrangement Information (rate case) to the Australian Energy Regulator (AER) for its gas distribution networks for the 5 year control period starting on 1^st July 2016. This article examines that Access Arrangement to set some context for the AER’s determinations.

A bit about ActewAGL’s gas networks

ActewAGL supplies about 138,000 customers in the Canberra, Queanbeyan and Palerang areas from 4,500km of distribution pipelines. The distribution network is supplied from the following two transmission pipelines…

· From the Dalton – Watson spur of the Moomba – Sydney Pipeline.

· From the Hoskintown receiving station on the Eastern Gas Pipeline (Longford).

Regulatory framework

The basis of the regulatory framework is the National Gas (South Australia) Act 2008, which sets out the National Gas Law as a Schedule to the Act. Section 26 of the Act provides for the National Gas Rules to have legal effect, and it is those Rules that set the detailed regulatory framework.

Key features of the process to date

Key features of the process to date include…

Parameter	Access Arrangement	Draft determination	Revised AA	Final determination
OpEx	$144m
CapEx	$116m
Opening RAB	$368m
Nominal vanilla WACC	7.15%
Revenue	$358m

Pipes & Wires will comment further as the AER releases its draft determination.

Queensland – the 2015-2020 revenue determinations

Introduction

Last year both Energex and Ergon Energy submitted their Regulatory Proposals (rate cases) to the Australian Energy Regulator for the 5 year regulatory period beginning on 1^st July 2015. This article examines the AER’s Final Determinations.

The regulatory framework

The regulatory framework has its basis in s7 of the National Electricity Law, which states the National Electricity Objective which is inter alia to promote efficient investment in electricity services for the long-term benefit of consumers. Chapter 6 of the National Electricity Rules sets out the details for economic regulation of distribution services.

Key features of the process to date (Energex)

Key features of the process to date include…

Parameter	Initial Proposal ($ nominal)	Preliminary Determination	Revised Proposal	Final Determination
Total OpEx	$1,738m	$1,877m	$1,874m	$1,738m
Total CapEx	$3,240m	$2,362m	$2,890m	$2,755m
Opening RAB	$11,313m	$11,334m	$11,334m	$11,173m
Regulatory depreciation	$502m	$455m	$480m	$476m
Smoothed DUOS revenue	$9,832m	$8,132m	$9,535m	$8,257m
P0	0%	40%	40%	1.7%
X	2%	From -17% to 5%	From -2% to -27%	1.5% to 1.0%

Key features of the process to date (Ergon)

Key features of the process to date include…

Parameter	Initial Proposal	Preliminary Determination	Revised Proposal	Final Determination
Total OpEx (nominal)	$2,035m	$1,788m	$1,779m	$1,842m
Total CapEx (real)	$3,555m	$2,182m	$3,441m	$2,858m
Opening RAB	$10,041m	$10,102m	$10,055m	$9,873m
Regulatory depreciation	$904m	$654m	$829m	$751m
Unsmoothed revenue	$8,229m	$6,012m	$7,728m	$6,295m
P0	15.85%	37%	37%	1.7%
X	Varies	From -14% to 6%	From -31% to 2%	1.5% to 1.0%

This concludes Pipes & Wires analysis of the Queensland revenue resets for another couple of years.

South Australia – the 2015-2020 revenue determination

Introduction

Last year SA Power Networks submitted its Regulatory Proposal (rate case) to the Australian Energy Regulator for the 5 year regulatory period beginning on 1^st July 2015. This article examines the AER’s Final Determination.

The regulatory framework

The regulatory framework has its basis in s7 of the National Electricity Law, which states the National Electricity Objective which is inter alia to promote efficient investment in electricity services for the long-term benefit of consumers. Chapter 6 of the National Electricity Rules sets out the details for economic regulation of distribution services.

Key features of the process to date

Key features of the process to date include…

Parameter	Initial Proposal ($ nominal)	Preliminary Determination	Revised Proposal	Final Determination ($ nominal)
Total OpEx	$1,554m	$1,334m	$1,422m	$1,262m
Total CapEx	$2,485m	$1,684m	$2,083m	$1,846m
Opening RAB	$3,829m	$3,829m	$3,829m	$3,778m
Regulatory depreciation	$936m	$554m	$642m	$917m
Unsmoothed revenue	$4,782m	$3,236m	$4,534m	$3,838m
P0	4.3%	28%	27%	10%
X	0%	9.9% to 1.1%	-23% to 0%	2.5% to 0.9%

This concludes Pipes & Wires analysis of the South Australian revenue reset for another few years.

Mergers & acquisitions

US – a new twist for the Exelon - Pepco merger

Introduction

Pipes & Wires #146 noted the planned appeal of the Washington DC PSC’s rejection of the Exelon - Pepco merger that had obtained regulatory approval from 5 of the 6 other regulators involved. This article briefly notes a new twist to the whole story.

Progress on the merger

It was previously noted that Exelon and Pepco will work to complete the merger, which involves appealing the Washington DC PSC’s decision. That decision was based inter alia on what the PSC saw as an inconsistency between Exelon’s fossil-fired generation fleet and Washington DC’s clean energy goals, and in particular how Exelon’s fossil-fired generation might get priority access to the DC retail electricity market.

In a letter signed by 7 of its 13 members, the Washington DC City Council asked the PSC to approve the merger, stating that the merger would result in improved supply reliability, increased use of renewable energy and continued employment in the DC metro area. Six members of council declined to endorse that letter.

The new twist to the story

An organisation called DC Public Power wants to convert Pepco into a public utility (ostensibly similar to the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, or possibly a customer cooperative like the trust-owned electric companies in New Zealand) on the basis that public ownership could deliver $1b of public benefits over 20 years. Part of the DCPP’s argument is that keeping the Washington DC retail electricity market independent of any generation provides a stronger pathway to distributed energy, micro-grids and energy efficiency.

Interestingly enough, the DCPP’s website shows a chart of average retail electric rates in 2012 (sourced from the APPA) which reveals average price differences between Publicly Owned, Investor-Owned and Cooperatives as being pretty small, what we might say within a few percent in the Commercial and Industrial customer classes but slightly lower for Residential customers. This also doesn’t show any municipal subsidies that may be given to Publicly Owned electric companies.

How might it play out ?

That’s always a difficult one to answer. What is clear is that DCPP’s objectives seem very much ideological whilst being cloaked in clean energy benefits.

Stepping back from this, it is important to recognise that Pepco is an investor-owned electric company, and its board has an obligation to maximize shareholder’s wealth. We might well ask how those private shareholders will be compensated if the PSC effectively forces Pepco to become a Muni or a Coop to further its own public policy objectives.

Solar, batteries & nett metering

Aus – is going off-grid really that feasible ?

Introduction

Going “off-grid” (or at least talking about it) has become very fashionable of late. A recent feasibility study conducted for the town of Tyalgum in the Australian state of New South Wales provides an opportunity to unpack this off-grid thing a bit more.

The Tyalgum feasibility study

Tyalgum is a small town in north-eastern NSW, about 2 hours’ drive from Brisbane, with a population somewhere between 250 and 300 (about 120 houses).

The feasibility study presented two core scenarios…

· Adopting a renewables-dominated micro-grid.

· Aiming for 100% renewables, with back-up using the grid (ie. not really going off-grid).

The cost of it all

The feasibility study estimates that 2.5ha (25,000m² or about 5 footy fields) of solar panels and 30m² of battery storage would be required to provide Tyalgum’s current 2.4GWh of annual consumption at a cost of between $3.5m and $4m for becoming largely self-sufficient and between $6.5m and $7m to become completely self-sufficient (some numbers I’ve cobbled together suggests it might be more like $10m to $12m for the solar panels alone, but let’s run with the feasibility study estimates).

The payback

The payback is obviously the avoided cost of…

· Electricity purchased from retailers, estimated to be between $315,000 and $365,000 per year. The assumption is made that electricity prices will increase over time.

· Distribution line charges, estimated by the feasibility study to be about $385,000 per year.

Presumably if the grid back-up scenario emerges, most if not all of the $385,000 per year in distribution charges will remain, meaning annual savings of about $350,000 per year plus any feed-in revenue derived from electricity exported back into the grid. That would suggest a payback period of something like 10 years, which obviously increases if the installation costs increase.

So it will be interesting to see how the proposal proceeds and what the $$$ end up actually being.

NZ – progress on the solar energy bill

Introduction

Pipes & Wires #145 examined the introduction of the Electricity Industry (Small-Scale Renewable Distributed Generation) Amendment Bill, a Bill designed to overcome perceived entry barriers to small-scale distributed generation by amending various clauses of the Electricity Industry Act 2010 and in particular regulate the price paid by a retailer for exported electricity.

The Bill gets its first reading

The Bill got its First Reading in October 2015, and given that the Bill would amend the Electricity Industry Act 2010 it is not surprising that the Hon Gerry Brownlee had much to say.

Pipes & Wires will comment further as the Bill progresses through the Committee and subsequent Readings.

US – California passes renewable energy bill

Introduction

Renewable energy targets are increasingly being required by legislation rather than simply being encouraged. This article examines the recent signing into law of California Senate Bill 350 by Governor Jerry Brown, and considers what it might do to California’s energy sector.

Key features of Senate Bill 350

The key features of Senate Bill 350 (otherwise known as the Clean Energy & Pollution Reduction Act 2015) are…

· To increase California’s renewable electricity target for the year 2030 from the 33% signed into law by Governor Brown in 2011 to 50%.

· To double the end use efficiency of electricity and natural gas consumption.

· To provide strong legal teeth for achieving the above targets.

Passage of the Bill through the corridors of power

SB 350 appears to have had a smooth passage through the various corridors of power, with a surprising degree of support at each of the committee and debate stages. However it is noted that parts of SB 350 were moderated as part of the inevitable lobbying by traditional energy interests.

What might be in store for California’s energy sector ?

Indeed … yes … what might be in store for California’s energy sector ? At a guess I’d say the following…

· There will be an increase in rooftop solar, almost certainly in conjunction with battery storage. Because this has to work politically, traditional electric companies (especially their wires businesses) are likely to come under further pressure to “make solar work”.

· There will be a decline in California’s remaining 370MW of coal-fired generation, but gas-fired generation may continue to play a key role buffering wind generation.

· Pressure to reduce gasoline consumption will almost certainly increase the penetration of electric cars (however this isn’t going to be helped by the recent plummeting cost of gas by about $1.60 per gallon in Los Angeles), which will obviously increase the demand for electricity (kWh). Unless care is taken to correctly incentivise off-peak charging, increased numbers of electric cars may end up just adding to peak load.

Like all thing, time will tell. Pipes & Wires #330 might examine this matter again to see how well the targets have been achieved.

Energy policy, markets & tariffs

Aus – could nuclear have a future ?

Introduction

Nuclear power is undoubtedly complicated … politically hard, increasingly expensive and publically controversial. However it does have two key advantages … it doesn’t emit CO₂, and the West has plenty of Uranium. This article considers whether nuclear might have a future in Australia as coal faces increased pressure.

The future of coal

One way or another, coal is under increasing pressure to play a reduced role in large scale generation. The recent appointment of a Prime Minister with pro climate change views and the elevation of a Minister of Resources & Energy with pro nuclear views is likely to both hasten the demise of coal and also provide an interesting opportunity for nuclear.

Securing energy supplies

An often over-looked aspect is the security of the West’s (non-transport) energy supplies. This is arguably not so much of an issue for Australia due to their abundant black and brown coal reserves, but it is something that became very clear in Western Europe as their dependence on piped gas from Russia and Iran increased. Nuclear provides a fantastic opportunity for the West to secure its energy supplies, as about 42% of the world’s recoverable Uranium reserves are owned by Australia, Canada and the USA.

South Australia’s Royal Commission into the nuclear fuel cycle

Earlier in 2015 the South Australian Government established a Royal Commission to investigate into the following 4 aspects of the nuclear fuel cycle…

· Exploration and mining.

· Processing.

· Nuclear electricity generation.

· Storage and disposal of waste.

The Royal Commission will report back in 2016.

The editor comments

Energy policy in western nations seems to be increasingly based around what we can’t do ... we can’t burn coal, we can’t dam large rivers, we can’t use valleys for pumped storage, we can’t have nuclear … with little obvious direction on what we can do. Hopefully this Royal Commission will provide a clear summary of the opportunities and risks that can be used to form a clear and positive way forward.

Aus – the controversial move toward demand-based tariffs

Introduction

Declining (nett) kWh throughput is forcing many electric distribution companies to increase the demand based component of their tariffs to enable full recovery of fixed costs. This article examines that theme a bit further, and delves into such murky matters as affordability, subsidies and solar connection charges that are applicable globally and not just in Australia.

The decline in nett kWh and the move to increased demand based tariffs

Several salient factors are reducing the nett kWh throughput by electric distribution companies…

· Reduced industrial kWh due to a sluggish economy.

· Reduced kWh due to improved energy efficiency.

· Reduced nett kWh due to increasing rooftop solar.

We might well ask why this is a problem for distribution companies that surely should concern themselves with capacity rather than throughput (volume). That is theoretically true, but historically the vertically integrated distribution and retail businesses have calculated a per-kWh price on the basis of expected average consumptions by various customers or customer classes (eg. the apparent average domestic consumption of 8,000kWh per year in the warmer bits of New Zealand) and then built their pricing models on those consumptions.

Of course, when consumption declines, kWh-based revenue and hence cost recovery declines which is the primary reason for re-balancing tariffs to include a higher kW-based charge and a correspondingly lower kWh charge. This of course can result in customers monthly bills varying significantly …. those customers who can reduce their kW demand during any specified peak periods might end up paying less, but those who can’t reduce demand will probably end up paying more. Customers with peaky loads (like air conditioners, that use more kW than kWh) are likely to pay more.

Changes to the National Electricity Rules

From 1^st July 2015 all Australian electricity distribution businesses have been required to develop tariffs that….

· Reflect the costs of supplying distribution services, and

· Send efficient pricing signals to customers.

These changes are in response to declining kWh revenue that will eventually under-fund distribution businesses and result in increasing supply interruptions. The inevitable consequence is that some customers will pay more, especially if they can’t reduce demand during peak periods.

The wider implications of moving toward demand tariffs

Some of the wider implications include…

· Social agencies are understandably concerned about the impact of this on the poor, especially those who can’t easily shift their essential demand such as cooking, drying laundry and bathing kids to off-peak periods.

· The increasing penetration of air conditioning and the subsidies from those with “historically correct” demand profiles to those with “peaky” demand profiles (in which high kW demand drives capital costs ahead of the kWh cost recovery).

· The increasing penetration of rooftop solar which creates demand, but which is not matched by kWh consumption and indeed maybe be combined with kWh injection. This has understandably led many electric companies to introduce monthly solar connection charges that regulators, policy makers and promoters of solar energy don’t seem to be able to understand.

Recent client projects

Here’s a sample of work done for clients over the last few years that demonstrate the breadth of skills, insight and experience that is available from Utility Consultants....

· Facilitating a board workshop on the likely impact of solar on distribution.

· Advising a major global investment bank on the revenue and capital cost characteristics of the New Zealand generation industry.

· Assessing the investment characteristics of proposed CapEx increases to an investor-owned electric network.

· Assessing three EDB’s asset management practices against ISO 55000:2014.

· Assessing an EDB’s compliance with the lines – generation separation requirements of the Electricity Industry Act 2010.

· Assessing an EDB’s compliance with the Electricity Industry Participation Code.

· Compiling safe operating procedures for a wide range of distribution switches.

· Advising an investor on the investment characteristics and regulatory constraints of small hydro development and grid connection.

· Reviewing the engineering aspects of an EDB’s lines pricing methodology.

· Advising a major global consultancy on specific features of emerging electricity transmission and distribution regulatory regimes, including period length, potential for re-opening determinations, caps & collars, total expenditure levels and incentive mechanisms.

· Examining the economic efficiencies of an EDB’s pricing methodologies.

· Advised on the wider philosophical and potential tax issues of the way consumer discounts are paid by EDB’s.

· Prepared an independent engineer’s report to justify proposed alternative asset lives.

· Advised an electricity business on the regulatory implications of bringing externally contracted field services back in-house.

· Identified economic and regulatory arguments to support inclusion of transmission interconnection charge risk into network tariffs.

· Advised lines businesses on a regulator’s proposed treatment of CapEx and OpEx.

· Advised an international investor on gas distribution policy and regulatory trends.

· Identified national energy policy implications for lines businesses.

· Assisted a lines business to identify the burden of proof implied by regulatory determinations.

· Suggested amendments to a gas transmission AMP to strengthen the economic arguments.

· Identified electricity network investment characteristics as part of an acquisition study.

· Developed an AM framework for a gas distribution business to link AM to regulatory requirements.

· Identified OpEx – CapEx tradeoffs for an electricity lines business.

· Performed various substation growth and reinforcement assessments.

· Performed network physical and business risk studies.

· Compiled disaster recovery and business continuity plans.

Pick here to download a profile of recent projects, or here to contact Phil.

General stuff

Guide to NZ electricity laws

I’ve compiled a “wall chart” setting out the relationship between various past and present electricity Acts, Regulations, Codes etc in sort of a chronological progression. To request your free copy, pick here. It looks really cool printed in color as an A2 or A1 size.

A bit of light-hearted humor

What if price control had been around in the 1920’s and 1930’s ? A collection of photo’s with humorous captions looks at some of the salient features of price control. Pick here to download.

Conferences & training courses

The following conferences and training courses are planned...

· No events scheduled.

Utility Consultants takes no responsibility for the content of individual courses or conferences, nor for any administrative or travel arrangements.

Wanted – old electricity history books

If anyone has an old copy of the following books (or any similar books) they no longer want I’d be happy to give them a good home…

· Economic Operation Of Power Systems (Kirchmayer).

· Distribution Of Electricity (WT Henley, the cable manufacturer)

· Northwards March The Pylons.

· Two Per Mile.

· Live Lines (the old ESAA journal).

· The Engineering History Of Electric Supply In New Zealand.

Cool stuff

Newly published book – “Keeping The Lights On”

Well-known electricity historian and author Helen Reilly has recently published her latest book “Keeping The Lights On – The History Of System Operations In New Zealand 1939 – 2013”. Pick here to order your copy for only $46.50 from Grid Heritage. It’s a thoroughly good read, and complements Helen’s previous book “Connecting The Country”.

House-keeping stuff

Opt out from Pipes & Wires

Pick this link to opt out from Pipes & Wires. Please ensure that you send from the email address we send Pipes & Wires to.

Disclaimer

These articles are of a general nature and are not intended as specific legal, consulting or investment advice, and are correct at the time of writing. In particular Pipes & Wires may make forward looking or speculative statements, projections or estimates of such matters as industry structural changes, merger outcomes or regulatory determinations. These articles also summarise lengthy documents, and it is important that readers refer to those documents in forming opinions or taking action.

Utility Consultants Ltd accepts no liability for action or inaction based on the contents of Pipes & Wires including any loss, damage or exposure to offensive material from linking to any websites contained herein, or from any republishing by a third-party whether authorised or not, nor from any comments posted on Linked In, Face Book or similar by other parties.