Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: More corrections needed
Next Post: *** UPDATED x2 *** Has the big fight finally begun?
Posted in:
* This press release has it all…
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (May 6, 2015) – Hundreds of supporters gathered at the Illinois State Capitol to urge the General Assembly to pass the Low Carbon Portfolio Standard (LCPS) (HB 3293 & SB 1585), delivering over 10,000 petition signatures to legislative leaders in support of the bill. A press conference hosted by the Byron Chamber of Commerce preceded the rally and called for passage of the legislation by the full Illinois General Assembly.
“The Low Carbon Portfolio Standard is an all-of-the-above energy strategy that will help preserve our nuclear energy facilities and is critical for our economy,” said Senator Donne Trotter (D-Chicago), a sponsor of the bill. “This legislation will help prevent the loss of up to 8,000 jobs, support zero and low carbon energy sources to maintain our national leadership in low carbon energy, and will help ensure we have the energy we need as a state.”
Well, it has it all except for the name of the corporate entity behind today’s “rally”: Exelon.
Also, the phrase “support zero and low carbon energy sources” should be changed to a single “source”: Nukes. As we’ve discussed before, the bill is written in such a way that Exelon is the only company that would qualify for the massive subsidy.
Also, too, anybody wanna bet me 5 bucks that most of those “petition” signatures are from towns with nuclear power plants?
* Let’s read on…
Six nuclear plants in Illinois generate nearly half of the state’s electricity and 90 percent of its carbon-free power.
And yet Exelon is attempting to blackmail the entire state by threatening to shut down at least some of those power plants.
* Continuing…
Senator Sue Rezin (R-Peru), a chief co-sponsor of the legislation, thanked the broad coalition of supporters gathered in Springfield, and highlighted what’s at stake if some of Illinois’ nuclear plants close, which may occur without legislative action.
“Energy leaders, economists, environmentalists, small business owners, labor unions, community groups and residents from all corners of the state have gathered to send a message of support for Illinois’ nuclear plants,” said Rezin.
Substitute “energy leaders” with “Exelon execs.”
* And environmentalists too? Hmm…
“If any of our nuclear plants close it will impact everyone in Illinois – not just the plant communities – through higher energy rates, the loss of up to $1.8 billion in economic activity every year, 8,000 lost jobs and a less reliable energy grid. The best way to prevent their closure and these costs is to enact the Illinois Low Carbon Portfolio Standard.”
The LCPS is technology-neutral, allowing low carbon energy sources – including wind, solar, hydro, clean coal and nuclear – to compete on equal footing. The legislative proposal was one of the market-based policy solutions recommended in a January 2015 report by four Illinois state agencies that studied the economic and environmental benefits of the state’s nuclear energy facilities, and the potential costs of the early closure of the three most at-risk plants.
“We’re talking about almost 8,000 job losses alone if these plants close,” said Michael Carrigan, President of the Illinois AFL-CIO. “Our current energy policies don’t properly value the jobs, the reliability, the energy diversity and the carbon-free power that nuclear energy provides.”
Doug O’Brien, Executive Director of the Illinois Clean Energy Coalition (ICEC), stressed the urgency of the situation and the environmental benefits of nuclear energy for Illinois.
“In addition to the well-documented economic benefits of these plants, we must put a value on nuclear’s environmental benefits,” said O’Brien. “We can never hope to meet our goals for carbon reductions and make progress towards a cleaner environment if we abandon clean nuclear and increase our reliance on fossil fuels.”
As mentioned above, Exelon’s bill shuts out other alt energy producers.
* But, hey, we’ve found our “environmentalists”! Or maybe not. Guess who sits on the Illinois Clean Energy Coalition’s board?…
Marshall Murphy
Vice President, Exelon GenerationDr. Phil O’Connor
Former Chairman, Illinois Commerce CommissionKim Maisch
State Director, National Federation of Independent Businesses
Murphy and Maisch are self explanatory. O’Connor was a utility friendly ICC chairman back in the day.
Most of the rest of the board members are local officials in towns with nuclear plants.
* More…
The LCPS proposal includes strong consumer protections, including a consumer price cap that would limit the impact to a 2.015 percent increase, or about $2 per month for the average Illinois residential electricity customer. A separate customer rebate provision would provide a direct bill credit to customers if wholesale electricity prices exceed a specified level.
Hooray! Exelon is pro-consumer! Except the Citizens Utility Board strongly favors an alternate plan.
* Continuing…
“Investing in our nuclear plants is good for our economy, for Illinois businesses and residents,” said Omar Duque, President and CEO of the Illinois Hispanic Chamber of Commerce. “Without these nuclear plants, we’ll lose billions of dollars in economic activity across the state. In addition, electric outages could occur more often and their lost generation could send power prices skyrocketing during peak demand. The Low Carbon Portfolio Standard is needed to prevent that possible outcome and encourage investment in Illinois.”
The state agency report found that closing the three at-risk nuclear energy facilities would result in $1.8 billion each year in lost economic activity, 8,000 job losses, and cost as much as $1.1 billion each year due to increases in carbon and other pollutants. According to a PJM analysis in the report, the plant shutdowns would result in up to $500 million annually in higher energy costs statewide. It concluded that, “Illinois’ continued economic success depends on maintaining low and stable electricity prices — and those low and stable prices depend on the continued operation of all nuclear generating stations located in Illinois.”
“The simple fact is, this is not a utility issue, this is a state issue,” said George S. Tolley, President, RCF Economic & Financial Consulting and Emeritus Professor of Economics, University of Chicago. “The nuclear plant closings would lead to significant losses in economic activity and jobs. The way our legislators respond will have long-term ramifications for the future of Illinois.”
Roderick Hawkins, Vice President of External Affairs for the Chicago Urban League, highlighted the importance of having a reliable supply of energy in Illinois. “When we need energy the most, especially during extreme weather, our homes and businesses are largely powered by nuclear energy,” said Hawkins. “The grid operator for northern Illinois has said it won’t be as reliable if the plants close. We can’t ignore this issue any longer.”
Minority group leaders are always an integral part of any utility-related PR bonanza. It’s been that way for years.
RCF Economic & Financial Consulting has done some work for ComEd in the past.
Also, Exelon is asking for $350 million in subsidies, which isn’t all that much lower than the “up to $500 million annually in higher energy costs” projected from plant closures.
* And, finally…
The negative impacts of closing the three at-risk nuclear plants would be especially pronounced in the local plant communities and regions of our state, according to local officials.
“Nuclear plant closings could be disastrous to the environment and the Illinois economy, but for me it’s even more personal than that - it’s the jobs, the families, the schools, the libraries, our police and firefighters who will be devastated by the closing of plants, including Byron,” said Deanna Mershon, Executive Director of the Byron Chamber of Commerce. “It’s the very fabric of our community that will be forever and irreparably harmed. Combined with the other adverse consequences of failing to act, I can’t imagine that the Illinois Legislature will fail to pass a Low Carbon Portfolio Standard and preserve these plants for all Illinoisans.”
Firefighters?! Nooooo!!!
Actually, Ms. Mershon is probably right. It’s not like Byron has any other major industrial property tax payers on the rolls. A plant closure would devastate that town.
So, instead of all this public blustering, how about everybody sits down and works out a compromise before doomsday hits?
[Headline explained here.]
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 11:34 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: More corrections needed
Next Post: *** UPDATED x2 *** Has the big fight finally begun?
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Just tax carbon pollution. Let the dirty energy plants pay more so the clean energy plants’ products are more competitively priced.
And we can help balance the state’s budget.
Comment by Dan Johnson Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 11:38 am
There should actually be a musical soundtrack to this post Mr. Miller. It would enhance the competing ironies.
Comment by A guy Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 11:41 am
And I thought fisking had something to do with being a human rain delay.
Comment by Cheryl44 Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 11:48 am
And just yesterday in Bloomberg( also carried by Crain’s):
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-05-03/radioactive-and-short-on-cash
And the rally had no mention of the VERY steep decline in property taxes paid at ALL the three threatened Illinois closure sights?
At some time these plants will close. It’s reality and always has been. Just a question if how the “inheritance” will be handed down.
Comment by Anon221 Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 11:55 am
These Exelon folks are my kind of guys. ;-/
Comment by Joe Isuzu Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 12:01 pm
Exelon has plenty of real market-based solutions in the works, on top of the recent and questionable MISO auction results. Instead they are building up a fake crisis to cash in now - so they can get even more bailouts.
In addition their bill doesn’t even guarantee that the 3 plants - or any of their 6 would stay open despite making ratepayers and business pay the tab on their rigged bailout.
Comment by SportShz Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 12:05 pm
Take and take and take, make big profits, then take some more.
Might as well when you can pocket legislators.
Comment by walker Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 12:05 pm
And if you are a “fan” of fracking:
http://m.fool.com/investing/general/2015/04/30/sorry-general-electric-the-doe-may-send-nuclear-wa
Comment by Anon221 Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 12:45 pm
Strange that our corruption-busting governor doesnt see how utilities using state-mandated profits are able to buy off legislators and interests to make more profits.
Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 12:45 pm
Pat Brady ring a bell? http://m.wuis.org/?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F#mobile/48868
Comment by Anon221 Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 1:15 pm
Exelon has no intentions of shutting down any of its nuclear plants. Call their bluff
Comment by foster brooks Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 1:42 pm
Foster-
Once again- they will NEVER be shutting these plants down, ever?
Comment by Anon221 Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 1:52 pm
Why not deregulate the entire energy industry and let providers compete on a level playing field?
The fact is, most taxpayers paid more for cable last month than they did for their energy needs.
The era of Pat Quinn railing against public utilities is over!
Comment by PoliticalPro Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 1:59 pm
Political-
I hope there was some snark in your post. I really would not want to live in a deregulated energy market which, I assume, would also roll back important environmental regulations. After, all, those affect the bottom line, too. Free markets aren’t free, and cheap energy is very expensive generations down the line.
Comment by Anon221 Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:27 pm
PP, what do you do for heat, burn cow chips?
Comment by Wordslinger Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:29 pm
Political Pro - Illinois deregulated the energy market in 1997. We’re 18 years into the experiment you suggest. Exelon made billions for about 17 of those years but last year things got tough so here comes the bailout!
Foster - You’re correct; Exelon’s not shutting those nukes. They are already obligated to run through summer 2017, no matter what happens in Springfield this year.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 2:36 pm
Illinois needs its nuclear plants, plain and simple. We can’t expect them to go away and have no negative impact on our state.
Comment by Kassi Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 3:56 pm
They had hundreds of people show up today for that rally. You can’t get that many people to take time out of their day unless these plant closings didn’t impact people from all over the state.
Comment by Sarah D Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:24 pm
If three stores in a chain were unprofitable, you would expect them to close. How is this different for utility companies? There are thousands of jobs at stake here - good jobs that support families! We can’t let these plants close.
Comment by Lowell Jaffe Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 4:41 pm
So Lowell, if three stores in a chain are losing money, by your logic those retailers should come to Springfield for a handout to keep those stores open? Really? After all, a lot of jobs are lost when stores close. So what’s the difference?
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 5:13 pm
Is there some reason a bill supporting low carbon energy sources of all kinds can’t be written? Aside from Excelon’s objection, I mean?
Comment by JackD Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 5:30 pm
So, to review: a company that posted $700 M in profits last qtr (not year– quarter!), which made millions more off of a very odd MISO auction a couple weeks ago, wants $300 Million from ratepayers per year. Or, we could get 32,000 new jobs a year and pay $1.6 billion less with the IL Clean Jobs Bill, according to ILCleanJobs.org, which Don Harmon and Elaine Nekritz have introduced. Easy pick– I’ll go with that one.
Comment by 102 Counties Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 5:57 pm
So Exelon will benefit from the bill… for the people opposing this bill, what is/are their offered solution that the people who will be impacted of possible plant closure will benefit from? When is 350M became greater that 1.8B? So, Exelon will have a 350M benefit from this bill. Can the government fill-in the 1.8B loss if these plant closed? If not the government, who will fill-in or shoulder the 1.8B loss?
Comment by Curious Wednesday, May 6, 15 @ 9:16 pm
Curious,
350M became greater when the $1.8B number is just another bit of Exelon fiction. And who will shoulder the loss? How about the company that made 40-50% (billions) and never once thought about sharing their profit with Illinois ratepayers? Why should they get all the profits when times are good but take none of the risk when times are not as good because they made a bad bet?
Comment by Anonymous Thursday, May 7, 15 @ 1:33 am