Posted on 11/09/2006 10:59:31 PM PST by NormsRevenge
A number of municipal utilities in Southern California, moving briskly to beat a January 1 deadline of a new state law targeting greenhouse-gas emissions, are extending long-term contracts for coal-fired energy--pacts that would be barred after California's law takes effect.
The law's author, Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, hopes to block the practice and intends to petition the Schwarzenegger administration to intervene. He has scheduled a November 20 meeting with utility representatives. The utilities, who opposed Perata's bill when it was in the Legislature, believe his law targets them unfairly and cripples their ability to maintain a balanced, cost-effective energy portfolio. Some environmentalists, meanwhile, plan to protest the utilities' decision and already have urged legislative leaders to get involved in opposing the contracts.
"We would definitely draw it to the governor's attention. He has been very clear this year about the direction he wants the state to move in reducing greenhouse gases," said Perata spokeswoman Alicia Trost.
Perata's bill, SB 1368, is intended to limit carbon pollution by forcing California utilities to purchase energy from power plants that meet greenhouse-gas emission standards. The bill, which Schwarzenegger signed on September 29, was crafted to prevent California's use of energy produced by coal burning, which is cheaper, but dirtier, than natural gas or alternative fuels.
The bill did not receive the international attention of Assembly Speaker Fabian Núñez's AB 32, the bill that would cut California's carbon emissions by one-fourth by 2020, but Capitol energy experts say that SB 1368 has greater short-term environmental and financial impact--and stronger enforcement teeth. The Perata bill applies to new contracts negotiated after January 1, as well to newly negotiated extensions of existing contracts. It does not affect agreements signed before January 1.
At issue is a series of contracts with Intermountain Power Project of Delta, Utah, a major power provider that uses coal-fired systems to generate power for a half-dozen Southern California cities. The contracts were intended to expire in 2027. IPP offered to extend the contracts beyond 2027 at prices favorable to the utilities. To take advantage of those terms, however, the agreements must be signed before the end of the year.
Municipal utilities, skeptical of the real impact of legislation to limit greenhouse gases, are buffeted by ratepayers on one side and cost-cutting local elected officials on the other. They are motivated to extend their power pacts, and it is easier for them to negotiate new contracts than it is for California's huge "IOUs," the investor-owned utilities--Southern California Edison, Pacific Gas and Electric, and San Diego Gas Electric. That's because the municipal utilities' power contracts, unlike those of the IOUs, can be approved at the local level, and don't require ultimate approval by the California Public Utilities Commission and the CPUC's Procurement Review Group.
Municipal utilities distribute about one-fourth of California's electrical power. Two of California's major publicly owned utilities, the Sacramento Municipal Utility District and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power, are not involved in the IPP contract issue.
Thus far, a handful of public utilities--Burbank, Riverside, Glendale, Pasadena--have signed or are preparing to negotiate contracts, and Anaheim is considering it, according to a November 4 report in the L.A. Times.
"The thing to remember about these contracts is that they will expire in quite a while anyway," said Jerry Jordan, executive director of the California Municipal Utilities Association, a 70-year-old trade association that represents dozens of public utilities. "And if California doesn't import the power, then it will be somebody else who will get the energy. The irony, of course, is that if it is an existing coal-fired plant, it is going to run anyway, no matter who operates it or who gets the energy."
The local public utilities' contracts, Jordan added, are not regulated by state authorities--and for good reason. "Of course, they are not regulated by the PUC because the PUC is there to protect the public against for-profit utilities," Jordan said. "AB 32 requires portfolio management of CO2 emissions, and it will take effect. But this legislation didn't allow a portfolio approach or recognize the need for power in the future."
But environmentalists are not convinced, and they expect to appear before local officials to protest the contracts that already have been signed and voice displeasure over any potential agreements.
"It is going to take time to work each of these cities," said V. John White of the Center for Energy Efficiency and Renewable Technologies, a nonprofit group that favors reductions in coal-fired energy. "There is a dark side to public power. But I have to think that the citizens there are going to be outraged when they find out about this. I think this will also cause a reaction in the Legislature, and I think it has undermined their claim of independence. … I think the Legislature will respond to this by giving more power to state agencies."
"..if California doesn't import the power, then it will be somebody else who will get the energy. The irony, of course, is that if it is an existing coal-fired plant, it is going to run anyway, no matter who operates it or who gets the energy."
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." -Manuel II Paleologus
If Chuckie Schumer gets his way we'll also be
seeing the return of gas rationing a.k.a.
the "Carter years".
Yes, the neo-comms are in power.
Just a reminder that the Gubinor supports this and AB 32 to the hilt.
Stay tuned for the coming 'we must raise taxes' debate that will be coming soon to the state Capitol.
It should be a doozy!
there isn't enuf natural gas for everyone to do this.
there would be a civil war, if this is imposed from Washington
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.