RSS FEEDS
Recent Research
JANUARY 24, 2011 | Policy Brief by ELIZABETH STELLE, KATRINA CURRIE
Citizen's Guide to Electric Choice & Competition 2011
In the late 1990s, Pennsylvania's electricity rates were 15% above the national average, despite the abundance of low-cost coal generation in the Commonwealth. At that time, electricity was sold by a monopoly utility provider in each designated region. Federal regulations then changed to allow electricity markets to develop. The state le
OCTOBER 27, 2010 | Commentary by PAUL CHESSER
Never Enough Green for Renewable Energy
According to Pennsylvania's Public Utilities Commission, the annual cost of ownership for solar energy per kilowatt-hour is over 700% more than the cost of coal, and wind energy is almost 23% more expensive than coal. Meanwhile, state government provides more than $20 million annually for grants to alternative energy projects, and in 2008, G
FEBRUARY 16, 2010 | Policy Brief by ELIZABETH STELLE, KATRINA CURRIE
Business Guide to Electric Choice & Competition
In the late 1990s, Pennsylvania's electricity rates were 15% above the national average, despite the abundance of low-cost coal generation in the Commonwealth. At that time, electricity was sold by a monopoly utility provider per designated region. Then federal regulations changed to allow electricity markets to develop. The state legislature re
Recent Blog Posts
NOVEMBER 21, 2011
Sky Darkens for Solar Mandates
HB 1580, which we wrote about previously, would accelerate state mandates for utilities to use solar power as part of their electricity portfolio.
A new Energy Association of Pennsylvania report calculates increased energy costs of more than $139 million annually if HB 1580 becomes law. Studies of similar laws in other states indicate that these costs will be directly passed on to consumers via higher utility rates.
The House Consumer Affairs Committee is scheduled to vote on HB 1580 on December 8. Government mandates in the legislation unfairly transfer the investment risk of solar power facilities from private investors to us, the consumers.
That risk is real and the bill should be voted down.
Environmental advocacy group PennFuture recently distributed a talking points memo warning solar supporters to avoid mentioning the infamous $528 million Solyndra scandal. Solyndra is but one of many green energy investment failures. Brightsource Energy Inc., a solar manufacturer with political connections, was the recipient of another $1.4 billion bailout.
Why should Pennsylvania force investment in an industry whose failure rate is skyrocketing? Solar energy's viability should depend on its success in the marketplace, not on subsidies and mandates enacted by politicians and backed by taxpayers.
posted by JOHN BOUDER | 02:03 PM | 0 comment
NOVEMBER 2, 2011
Marcellus Shale Lowers Heating Bills
The Pittsburgh Tribune and Erie Times report natural gas prices are decreasing as we approach the winter months. Rates per thousand cubic feet are dropping across western Pennsylvania.
| Company | 2010 Rate | 2011 Rate | Decrease |
| Equitable Gas | $7.35 | $6.51 | 11% |
| Columbia Gas of Pennsylvania | $7.77 | $5.52 | 29% |
| National Fuel Gas Distribution Corp. | $10.41 | $9.56 | 8.2% |
Pennsylvania consumers have benefited from a 70 percent reduction in natural-gas prices since 2008, in large part due to the dramatic growth in shale gas. Last year, Marcellus gas production saved Pennsylvanians an estimated $633 million in utility costs, or about $200 for every family of four. The savings have been especially beneficial for low-income families, who spend almost a quarter of their after-tax income on energy.
The benefits of natural gas development are statewide. Any attack on affordable energy is an attack on Pennsylvanians' ability to heat their homes, run hot water and cook food for less.
posted by ELIZABETH STELLE | 03:40 PM | 0 comment
OCTOBER 7, 2011
Regulation or Electrification?
The Wall Street Journal brings to light new documents showing the Environmental Protection Agency operates as an overbearing parent, not a servant of the people. New regulations targeting air quality and mercury production in coal-fired power plants are projected by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) to reduce electricity production by 8 percent. That's 81 gigawatts of power no longer available, which is enough electricity to power about 8,100 Pennsylvania homes for a year.
This is in addition to the EPA's other job-killing regulations that will increase electricity rates by 13 to 17 percent in Pennsylvania and cost thousands of jobs.
Why is the EPA rushing these punitive rules at a time of great economic uncertainty?
FERC says less burdensome regulations could have the same net benefit, so it's not about protecting the environment. Following the proposed reduction in output, consumers would be more susceptible to power outages and rolling blackouts during peak usage. Your power would be less reliable just when you need it the most. Clearly, the EPA places real people's welfare last on its priority list.
The Journal ends its article by assuring us that FERC has the power to overrule the EPA if their regulations are deemed too costly. One federal bureaucracy may be overseeing another, but consumers will never have real protection while we have regulation without representation.
posted by JOHN BOUDER | 09:30 AM | 0 comment
