Posted by Snow in 
Considering the vast (read, ugly pig trough) of Treasury green being flung to consumer over home mortgages and new hybrid cars, the California mandate to be at least 30% renewable by year 2020 should be within range.
With the scope of available alternate power sources, California’s cup of wind energy and hydokinetic energy (not to mention solar energy) runneth over, and over, and over. California is nothing if not solar.
But SCE CEO says different. Writing to the Los Angeles Times, he objects to these goals as obtainable and specifices how the conjoined energy goals of California are actually working against each other and canceling each other out.
“,.,And a pending state mandate to enhance protection for ocean habitats could force some of the state’s 19 coastal power plants to close.
Taken individually, each of these policy proposals has merit. But combined, they actually work against each other and jeopardize reliability, increase costs and impede California’s ability to achieve higher renewable goals.
Finally, achieving the 33% goal will require massive investment. The previously mentioned CPUC study estimated that the required new generating facilities, transmission lines and other grid infrastructure will cost $115 billion.
Californians may not be prepared for the potentially large impact on electricity bills this investment will require, particularly in this economy.
We are proud of California’s leadership in renewable energy and excited about the future of alternative green generation technologies. Achieving California’s goals for renewable energy takes a long-term commitment and an enormous amount of investment, not a feel-good slogan. The underlying rules do matter. Let’s get this important energy policy decision right.
Alan J. Fohrer is chief executive of Southern California Edison.
RSS Feed