Tuesday, February 16, 2010
PG&E Funds Anti-Green Measure
Politics / Business / Environment Robert Gammon — Tue, Feb 16, 2010 at 10:42 AM
Pacific Gas and Electric Company has already spent $6.5 million on a June ballot measure that would make it much tougher for cities to purchase renewable energy on their own. And the public utility plans to spend millions more of rate-payer dollars on its measure, Proposition 16. PG&E is digging deep into its treasury because it fears losing market share if municipalities get into the public power business in order to increase their usage of green energy, including solar and wind power.
Prop. 16 would force municipalities to get a supermajority, two-thirds vote from citizens before getting into the public power market. In other words, a small minority of voters could block grassroots efforts to combat climate change. Prop. 16 also would require a supermajority vote for existing public power agencies, including Alameda’s municipal power company, before they can expand into the green-energy market.
PG&E has maintained over the years that it supports renewable energy, but as the Express has reported previously, the utility in actuality, is spending huge sums on increasing its natural-gas consumption, thereby adding to the state’s greenhouse gas emissions.
Comments (7)
Showing 1-7 of 7
Absolutely false. PG&E's underhanded Prop 16 will block large renewable energy projects like Community Choice, because to create such community-wide networks requires more than just installing renewables and efficiency; it also requires grouping the electricity customers themselves into a co-op which has the buying and bonding power to build the facilities. So PG&E's power grab - Prop 16 - would allow a mere third of the voters, in any community that seeks such a citywide clean energy co-op, to block the project.
That's not democracy or choice - it's blocking choice and locking in PG&E's high priced dirty electricity.
Vote NO on Prop 16!
like
dislike
More misinformation by the proponents of Prop 16. Yes on 16 has to get his/her/its facts straight. The section quoted above ONLY applies to a local government's using "renewable" energies for its "own end use not for electric delivery service to others". The section implies that if a local municipal energy provider wants to provide renewable energy to the local power grid, hence the public that will receive said power, it will have to be put up to a 2/3 vote.
So, sure, your local public power company can build and develop all the wind farms, solar arrays, etc. it wants to, but provide that energy to the local grid??? Not if PG&E has anything to say about it!!!
I also get the feeling the above section can be construed as only applying to projects started or approved before Prop 16 passes, not after.
Prop 16 will have no negative impact whatsoever on the development of renewable energy projects in California. In fact, renewable energy projects are clearly and specifically exempted from the initiative’s voter approval requirements.
Doing so is consistent with existing state law and policy providing for incentives and support for the development of clean, renewable energy.
Section 9.5(h) clearly states: This Section shall not apply to an bonded or other indebtedness or liability or use of public funds that (1) has been approved by the voters within the jurisdiction of the local government and within the territory to be served, is any, prior to the enactment of this section; or (2) is solely for the purpose of purchasing, providing, or supplying renewable electricity from biomass, solar thermal, photovoltaic, wind, geothermal, fuel cells using renewable fuels, small hydroelectric generation of 30 megwatts or less, digester gas, municipal solid waste conversion, landfill gas, ocean wave, ocean thermal, or tidal current, or providing electric delivery service for the local government’s own end use not for electric delivery service to others.
http://www.taxpayersrighttovote.com/
As the author of, and "administrator" of the Facebook group in, the first comment post, I must say that Powergrab.info has been a one stop source of information for all things Prop 16 since I learned about the initiative and started the Facebook group. It is a great website and I encourage everybody interested in learning more about the truth behind the PG&E financed Proposition 16.
-Dave
The official opposition web site to PG&E's initiative is powergrab.info which is a coalition of The Utility Reform Network, Local Power, Sierra Club California, and supporters of Community Choice Aggregation and Green Power throughout California. Powergrab.info has the most up to date and complete list of recent journalism on the PG&E Initiative from dozens of independent publications like East Bay Express. Please visit our site, sign up for updates or to get involved.
http://www.powergrab.info
Exactly as the article says, Prop 16 would mandate that any local community who wants to expand or upgrade their public utilities, or implement green technologies such as solar or wind, has to hold a local election and must get a 2/3 majority before moving ahead with the project. Also, say you build a house just outside of the public utilities supply area, and you would like them to be your provider, under this loosely worded initiative, just to get hooked up would have go before a community vote and get a 2/3 majority.
Here's the rub. Many municipalities in California have been doing just fine running their own public utilities. Most publicly run utilities, though cheaper than PG&E, run more efficiently, actually run at a profit, and put more cash into the localities purse, keeping that money within a community. By putting any future projects to a vote will probably cost the community in terms of time put off on the project/s to hold the special election, money spent on it, and the possibility that the local measure, which the local area may need desperately, may not pass. A 2/3 majority is not an easy majority to obtain. Matter of fact, it is arguably one of the reasons our state is in the mess it is in. To be honest, if Prop 16 mandated a simple 51% majority vote, I would probably not be as opposed as I am. And since this measure is an amendment to our states constitution, it will take another proposition to annul it.
This measure, very deceptively named "Taxpayers Right to Vote", is financed entirely by PG&E, and I have come to the conclusion that it is actually a power grab, an effort by PG&E to further monopolize our state's power grid. Please vote NO on Prop 16. This measure is bad for California, and not needed.
If you would like to learn more, please check out our little grassroots Facebook group in opposition to this initiative.
Here's a link:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=3316…
