[ 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

Colorado House passes controversial renewable energy mandate bill  

Credit:  By Joe Moylan, Tuesday, April 30, 2013, steamboattoday.com ~~

A controversial bill that increases renewable energy mandates for rural electricity cooperatives was approved by the Colorado House of Representatives on Tuesday.

Colorado Senate Bill 13-252, which ups the renewable energy mandates from 10 percent to 20 percent by 2020, passed by a 37-27 vote.

Although the bill passed Tuesday, it did not make it out of the House completely unscathed. In its original version, which passed earlier this month in the Senate, the bill called for an increase in renewable energy mandates from 10 percent to 25 percent by 2020. An amendment dropping the mandate to 20 percent was passed last week in the House.

The bill specifically targets Tri-State Generation and Transmission Association, operator of the coal-fired Craig Station power plant. Tri-State officials have been adamantly opposed to the legislation since it was first introduced in April.

Jim Van Someren, communications manager for Tri-State in Westminster, said the amendment reducing the mandate from 25 percent to 20 percent did little to soften the company’s position against the legislation.

“We still oppose” the bill, Van Someren said.

The legislation would have a minimal impact on Yampa Valley Electric Association, which purchases its electricity from Xcel Energy.

The bill now returns to the Senate for a concurrence vote.

House District 26 Rep. Diane Mitsch Bush, D-Steamboat Springs, voted in favor of the legislation, citing her belief that the bill is not an attack on “high-quality, high-BTU, low-sulphur, low-mercury Colorado coal,” which she said will be a staple of Colorado energy production for the next 50 years.

“I voted ‘yes’ on SB 252 because I believe this legislation will help the private sector develop new green jobs and maintain the more than 19,000 clean energy jobs in Colorado,” Mitsch Bush wrote in an email Tuesday night. “I heard from many constituents in the construction industry in our district (including Routt and Eagle counties) that renewable projects kept them going during the recession.

“New jobs and new businesses will emerge as the demand for renewables increases. This includes coal mine methane, biomass and pyrolysis of landfill materials.”

Mitsch Bush previously voted for the bill in committee but said after her vote that she wouldn’t support it on the House floor unless it was amended. She said she co-sponsored the amendment that reduced the requirement from 25 percent to 20 percent.

During his testimony Tuesday against the bill, Colorado House District 57 Rep. Bob Rankin, R-Carbondale, said both sides of the aisle were guilty of presenting false arguments.

In an effort to stray from the focus of pitting fossil fuels against renewables or rural Colorado versus urban Colorado, Rankin told fellow representatives that SB 13-252 represented more than just a debate about energy.

“I came here to represent rural Colorado and I knew as a rural legislator I would be outnumbered and that I would have to fight for our heritage, but I didn’t expect I would have to fight this hard,” Rankin said. “We do not want to divide the two parts of our culture, we want to bring them together.

“We need to look at the big picture and not just support renewable (energy) lobbyists. We need to look at this as an opportunity to support the culture and the heritage of this state.”

But Rankin didn’t pass up the opportunity to slam the renewable energy industry.

“Wind energy is touted as a replacement for fossil fuel-powered generation, (but) since the wind blows intermittently and unpredictably, it must be backed up by fast-start natural gas generation for an average of 70 percent of the time,” Rankin said in a statement. “Since fast-start natural gas generation releases more carbon than slower started combined cycle natural gas generation, CO2 release is roughly the same for a wind farm with natural gas backup as full-time, combined cycle natural gas-powered generation.”

Source:  By Joe Moylan, Tuesday, April 30, 2013, steamboattoday.com

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.