[ exact phrase in "" • results by date ]

[ Google-powered • results by relevance ]


News Home

Subscribe to RSS feed

Add NWW headlines to your site (click here)

Sign up for daily updates

Keep Wind Watch online and independent!

Donate $10

Donate $5

Selected Documents

All Documents

Research Links


Press Releases


Publications & Products

Photos & Graphics


Allied Groups

Clean-energy mandate a dirty shame  

Credit:  The Orange County Register, www.ocregister.com 31 March 2011 ~~

Anyone who really thinks that the state’s Democratic legislative majority has a clue about how to lead California out of a devastating recession and out of an ongoing state budget crisis, should have paid attention to the Legislature’s action Tuesday. Lawmakers gave final approval to a bill mandating that utilities purchase a third of their electricity from renewable sources, such as solar and wind power, by 2020, a significant increase from the current mandate of 20 percent renewable. Next stop is Gov. Jerry Brown, who has not taken a position on the bill but has strongly supported its goals.

In essence, the state’s leaders have imposed a severe energy tax on California businesses and consumers, and even increased costs to one of California’s biggest energy users – a state government that already is awash in red ink. “Fossil fuels are finite, and demand for energy is growing,” said the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, according to published reports. If so, then wouldn’t the market mandate an eventual switch to renewables?

It’s hard to understand how imposing this mandate will do anything other than impose additional burdens on Californians at a time of record-level unemployment and just as increasing numbers of businesses are fleeing the high costs and regulatory burdens here. Democrats pitched the legislation as a job-creation measure, as if government can create jobs by edict. Whatever jobs are gained in the supposedly burgeoning alternative-energy world will easily be offset by lost jobs in most other sectors of the economy.

A California Air Resources Board study finds that average retail electricity rates will increase by 19 percent over those under the current 20 percent mandate for Pacific Gas and Electric customers, which means a total increase of 44 percent from 2008-20. Southern California Edison users will face an increase of 15 percent and 34 percent respectively, while Los Angeles Department of Water and Power customers face hikes of 26 percent over the current mandate and will face 74 percent retail rate increases by 2020, when the new edicts go into effect.

By the way, those are average rate increases. Because the state so heavily subsidizes the rates of lower-income Californians, the bulk of the hikes will fall on the middle class. And Californians already pay electricity rates more than a third higher than the national average. Even a more conservative estimate puts estimated average increases at above 7 percent.

Yet state officials are so zealous in their support for alternative energy mandates that they actually believe that the new government-created green jobs economy will make up for all hardship these increases will impose on everyone else. Critics rightly question where the money will come from to pay for the tens of billions of dollars in new capital projects that will be necessary to achieve these goals.

The legislation is filled with costly provisions, including one mandating that alternative energy producers pay union wages, which will only make the mandates that much more difficult to achieve. The bill also requires that most of the energy be generated by California producers. The legislation expands the size of the state bureaucracy and adds more rules and regulations on an industry desperately in need of the imposition of more market forces.

Unfortunately, this is the California approach, and it is a wrong and wrongheaded direction. Gov. Brown should veto this bill.

Source:  The Orange County Register, www.ocregister.com 31 March 2011

This article is the work of the source indicated. Any opinions expressed in it are not necessarily those of National Wind Watch.

The copyright of this article resides with the author or publisher indicated. As part of its noncommercial effort to present the environmental, social, scientific, and economic issues of large-scale wind power development to a global audience seeking such information, National Wind Watch endeavors to observe “fair use” as provided for in section 107 of U.S. Copyright Law and similar “fair dealing” provisions of the copyright laws of other nations. Send requests to excerpt, general inquiries, and comments via e-mail.

Wind Watch relies entirely
on User Funding
Donate $5 PayPal Donate


News Watch Home

Get the Facts Follow Wind Watch on Twitter

Wind Watch on Facebook


© National Wind Watch, Inc.
Use of copyrighted material adheres to Fair Use.
"Wind Watch" is a registered trademark.