State officials say Oregon energy bill would boost rates, wouldn't cut emissions

The Oregonian/OregonLive ^ | January 16, 2016 | Ted Sickinger

[Lonely Bull]

State utility regulators have expressed deep reservations to Gov. Kate Brown about a proposed bill that would fundamentally restructure Oregon's energy supply by 2040, eliminating coal-fired power and forcing utilities to serve half their customers' demand with renewable power.

Commissioners and staff at the Oregon Public Utility Commission believe the bill would increase electricity costs and shift risk from utilities to ratepayers. They also say it wouldn't actually reduce carbon dioxide emissions, according to communications released to The Oregonian/OregonLive in response to a public records request.

The commissioners prepared those talking points to respond to the media and legislator calls they expected when utilities and environmental groups released their Clean Energy and Coal Transition Plan earlier this month. But the governor's office directed the commissioners, whose primary charge is protecting consumer interests, not to share any of its feedback publicly.

[roadcat]

The shift to renewable power and away from coal-fired power is an idiotic and dangerous move. Why? If a disaster occurs, either natural or man-made, power is going to be needed online quickly. Can't do that if you're relying on solar or wind in a pinch. It's easy enough to fire up power generation relying on fuels like oil or coal, and get all the power necessary to recover from disasters.

In San Francisco, the liberal "leaders" were pushing to demolish oil-fired generation plants within the city, in order to go "greener". The state Public Utilities Commission wouldn't allow it, because cities in the state are required by California law to be able to generate a percentage of their own power in case of emergencies. And there isn't enough sunlight or wind to generate an equivalent percentage of power that an oil-fired plant can generate at a moment's notice.

Surprising that so-called "liberal" California is a bit wiser than the folks in Oregon.

[PROCON]

Idiotic.

[Rinnwald]

...the bill would increase electricity costs and shift risk from utilities to ratepayers. They also say it wouldn't actually reduce carbon dioxide emissions...

That is just Jim Crack Dandy!

Most environmental initiatives are much worse. They do actual harm and cost a bundle. Pay an arm and a leg, and still have the EPA breach that sludge dam!

This one just costs money and doesn't do anything. I'd be in that for a penny and a dollar. It'll tie up some bureaucrats for a while, anyway.

[beethovenfan]

Oregon and Kalifornia in a race to the bottom.

[Salvation]

If you would like more information about what's happening in Oregon, please FReepmail me.

I lost my Oregon list when my computer crashed last year, so please send me your name by FReepmail if you want to be on this list.

[clearcarbon]

"State officials say Oregon energy bill would boost rates, wouldn't cut emissions'

Who benefits?