The danger of saving energy

[ksa8907]

Originally Posted by aerostealth

If we are ever to get to reducing our carbon foot prints we must stop rewarding large users and incentivise conservative users instead, which is the reverse of what we do today. This will require a tiered rate structure like you sometimes see with water utilities.

There are no incentives for using more. It seems that way, but thats because bills are structured to pay for fixed costs in a variable way. If i only use 1kwh this month my bill will be about $15 which does not cover the fixed costs associated with maintaining the infrastructure. $90 - $100 is the break point where an electric utility goes from losing to making money. Does anybody think it actually costs 16 cents to generate a kwh of electricity?

Large users pay a lower rate because they would be overpaying the fixed cost portion if they were on the residential rate.

[aerostealth]

All that is irrelevant. It cost over $3.00 a watt to install new generating capacity. A tiered rate structure which penalized excessive use beyond a certain level for all classes of end users is what is needed. We also need distributed generation capacity. The utilites are a monopoly designed to provide a public service, not to make large profits.. They need to be regulated as such.

[ksa8907]

Originally Posted by aerostealth

All that is irrelevant. It cost over $3.00 a watt to install new generating capacity. A tiered rate structure which penalized excessive use beyond a certain level for all classes of end users is what is needed. We also need distributed generation capacity. The utilites are a monopoly designed to provide a public service, not to make large profits.. They need to be regulated as such.

They are regulated. All must file a rate case which, if approved, allows them to recoup expenses they already spent. Utilities can't just charge whatever they want.

You would want to penalize all factories in the US? Boy, you would do great things to our economy....

[aerostealth]

Regulated in the public interest or in their own interest? That is the crux of the issue now isn't it.

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by ksa8907

They are regulated. All must file a rate case which, if approved, allows them to recoup expenses they already spent. Utilities can't just charge whatever they want.

This isn't entirely accurate, our area for example was mostly hydro powered through the 80's. Our energy usage due to the reduction in the number of corporate interests is actually not significantly different than it was in the 1980s.

We had Weston I & II to make up the slack that hydro did not provide historically.

In the 2000's we ended up with Weston III & IV which were built solely to provide power for other areas such as northern MN & Canada, ZERO percent of the energy produced at these new non-pollution controlled plants is used locally. It also created a "power line" boondoggle as they tried to take northern WI properties for the line (remember that)

In conjuction with this we have been moving to eliminate hydro, moving us further onto coal, though there are wind projects cropping up.

The result of these projects is that our electricity cost per KWHR (residential) has doubled (its still not super high like other areas), our fees have gone up triple (depending on which years we compare) and we get to have far more pollution warnings.

In other words our local energy provider has found a way to increase revenue because we are required to pay for new projects, while at the same time providing zero local benefit. (a couple hundred jobs isn't much in the bucket)

They are now stating that if they have to install scrubbers on 3 & 4 our cost per KWHR will have to go up further to cover their ignorance during the bush years where they could just pay a small fine to pollute.

Ah well.

[aerostealth]

Read Virgins and Dynomoes by David Roe.

[ksa8907]

Energy distribution and transmission are two entirely separate animals.

It is true that utilities can create modernization programs and are typically allowed, by the state utility commission, to recoup costs. IF it is approved. Not all projects are approved and if things are not done properly or as promised, the commission is very likely to freeze or even reduce their rate. Being regulated, utilities are ipen to audits of pretty much anything the commission wants to see.

[rmay635703]

Originally Posted by ksa8907

Energy distribution and transmission are two entirely separate animals.

It is true that utilities can create modernization programs and are typically allowed, by the state utility commission, to recoup costs. IF it is approved.

I live in Wisconsin and the reactionary policies in this state may be unique but our commissions, committees and other regulatory entities have been more or less been made into clearing houses bought and paid for, laws have been moving toward closed door donor support systems.

When legal action has occurred due to racketeering and other violations it just gets swept under the rug.

Not to be negative but federal interference would be the only way to remove the corruption out of this state.

One hand washes the other sadly

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by rmay635703

Not to be negative but federal interference would be the only way to remove the corruption out of this state.

Have the citizens lost the ability to vote on their local representatives?

People deserve the consequences of those they allow to be in power; good and bad.

[aerostealth]

Language problem here is making things lost in translation. My point is electric utilities should not just be in the business of selling power. They should rightly be in the business of reducing the inefficient use of power and in promoting the efficient end use of power. I dont care what is but rather i am looking to what things could be.if we are ever going to reduce and eliminate fossil fuel use we are going to have to change the way things are done.