ICC Alternative to SB 1652 doesn’t add up
Tuesday, Sep 20, 2011 - Posted by Advertising Department
[The following is a paid advertisement.]
Chicago Tribune editorial (September 13, 2011)
“[The ICC proposal] would wrap grid modernization in a familiar ball of red tape. It wouldn’t give utilities an incentive to invest in major technology upgrades. It’s pretty much a nonstarter.”
If that doesn’t say it all, there’s more
The ICC proposal only addresses half of the costs of grid modernization.
This means…
Consumers pay more.
The proposal keeps utilities stuck in the stop-and-start process that’s prevented efficient, long-term grid modernization.
The jobs benefit is virtually lost
Job creation requires long-term infrastructure planning.
Reliability benefits are gutted.
Reliability gains mandated in SB 1652 will be gone for lack of multi-year planning.
Accountability is removed.
Utilities can’t commit to performance standards without more predictable cost recovery.
SB 1652 is a better policy.
• It creates the most progressive, accountability-based regulatory model in the country, protecting consumers in ways the current law does not.
• It’s supported by a diverse cross-section of business groups, labor unions, environmental organizations and high-tech advocates.
• Independent policy experts support the bill, including Ray Romero, former ICC commissioner; Ken Costello, former ICC economist; and John Kelly, Galvin Electricity Initiative.
For more information, visit www.SmartEnergyIL.com.
