“Our utilities are working in collusion with NGOs and ENGOs that promote decarbonization over affordability and reliability. Compromised utility board members will waste no time using this change in statute to gaslight everyone around them into believing this is what is best for them.”
The short title of Alaska’s SB 257 – Electric Utility Regulation refers to a monstrous process of government-on-government:
“An Act relating to the Regulatory Commission of Alaska; relating to public utilities; relating to electric reliability organizations; relating to the Alaska Energy Authority; relating to the Railbelt Transmission Organization; and providing for an effective date.”
This bill was introduced by the Alaska Senate Resources Committee on March 1, 2024. Per the sponsor statement, “Senate Bill 257 lays the groundwork for an electric system that is more affordable, more sustainable, more equitable, a grid that can power a prosperous future for generations of Alaskans to come.”…
Continue Reading“The score for this bill in its present state is a -7 with -9 being the worst, 0 neutral, and +9 being the best for freedom and liberty.”
HB 368 was introduced by Representative George Rauscher, chair of the Special House Energy Committee. Clean Energy Standards (CES) is the evil twin of the Renewable Portfolio Standard, Despite, the claim by this committee that there are no penalties for utilities to contend with, its just smoke-and-mirrors in terms of ratepayer welfare, energy reliability, and economic freedom from energy statism.
On March 22, 2024, the House Special Committee on Energy advanced the bill out of committee by a vote of 4-3 to establish a CES under HB 368. The purpose of the bill is “to establish a clean energy standard that requires certain electric utilities to derive increasing percentages of the utility’s net electricity sales from clean energy sources.”…
Continue Reading“It is entirely possible that the total costs to build, maintain and replace units every 20+ years (at end of service) would be prohibitive compared to other sources of energy. Beyond these cost considerations, sources indicate that the turbine blades cannot be recycled and are piling up in landfills. Fossil fuels will also still be needed to maintain the lubrication of these units, and what about potential for spillage?” (Jeff Wyles, below)
The old joke comes to mind: Q: When is an environmentalist not an environmentalist? A: When it comes to wind power.
Make that double for offshore wind, and wild-eyed California politicians are having trouble hiding the problems. Consider a recent op-ed, Rethink Floating Wind Turbine Power Off Our California Coastline?,” an environmental feature of California newspaper MendoFever (February 12, 2024).…
Continue Reading