** PURPA under attack by utilities and their front groups ([link removed])
------------------------------------------------------------
By Dave Anderson on Dec 16, 2019 04:26 pm
Electric utilities are backing a proposal to gut the Public Utilities Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA), a federal law that supports the growth of renewable energy and competition in electricity markets, and they brought their network of special interest groups and paid consultants to the fight.

A Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NOPR) backed ([link removed]) by President Trump’s Republican appointees to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission would gut PURPA’s support for renewables ([link removed]) . Attorneys general for eight states warned that the move ([link removed]) could jeopardize states’ ability to meet their clean energy and climate goals.

The move was immediately praised ([link removed]) by the Edison Electric Institute (EEI), which has targeted PURPA for over 40 years ([link removed]) , in a joint statement with the American Public Power Association and National Rural Electric Cooperatives Association. EEI also submitted comments ([link removed]) to FERC in support of the NOPR, comments that were echoed by EEI member utilities ([link removed]) like Southern Company ([link removed]) , which said that it “actively participated in the development of the EEI comments” in its own filing on the issue.
Neil Chatterjiee, the Republican chair of FERC, tweeted this photo after speaking with EEI’s Board of Directors earlier this year. At the time FERC had a docket open ([link removed]) where it gathered comments on PURPA referenced in the current NOPR.

Other utilities also endorsed EEI’s comments, including:
* Alliant Energy ([link removed])
* Arizona Public Service Company ([link removed])
* Duke Energy ([link removed])
* FirstEnergy ([link removed])
* NextEra Energy ([link removed])
* Pacific Gas and Electric Company ([link removed])
* San Diego Gas & Electric Company ([link removed])
* Southern California Edison Company ([link removed])
* Xcel ([link removed])

A subsidiary of one major utility, Consolidated Edison Development, weighed in that it “strenuously” opposes the NOPR ([link removed]) . Con Edison Development develops renewable energy projects, often selling the electricity at rates governed by PURPA.

“CED strenuously objects to the Commission’s proposed rule changes, not the least of which because of several aspects of the Commission’s NOPR are unlawful and discriminatory in violation of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978,” Consolidated Edison Development said in its comments to FERC.

“There is little evidence that the current regulations produce a bad result, and there is every reason to think that the current regulations have produced new technology, created competition with incumbent monopoly utilities, and have provided renewable energy to customers at a rate that holds them indifferent,” it also said.

Beyond that defection, utilities largely lined up behind EEI’s campaign to gut PURPA, consistent with the utility industry’s long history of lobbying against policies that promote clean energy and challenge their monopolies.

Below is an overview of some of the consultants and front groups utilities that are part of the utility industry’s campaign against PURPA.


** We Stand for Energy
------------------------------------------------------------

A petition with only 300 signatures ([link removed]) was submitted to FERC by We Stand for Energy ([link removed]) , a national astroturf group correctly identified in FERC’s PURPA NOPR docket as a “Project of the Edison Electric Institute.”

EEI paid for We Stand for Energy’s Facebook ads ([link removed]) to promote the petition and a related video. We Stand for Energy NC also paid for a Twitter ad attacking PURPA ([link removed]) . EEI member Duke Energy has also attacked PURPA in Florida and North Carolina ([link removed]) .

We Stand for Energy argues that PURPA needs to be “modernized” by FERC because “… wind and solar energy have grown to be important parts of our energy mix, and parts of PURPA no longer make sense.”

While wind and solar have grown since PURPA was first enacted in 1978, combined they still produce only around 7% of the electricity generated in the U.S ([link removed]) . EEI’s internal documents have shown that utilities feel threatened ([link removed]) by the strong support for shifting to 100% renewable energy among their customers.

We Stand for Energy supports major gas projects like the Atlantic Coast Pipeline ([link removed]) that will lock in utilities’ dependence on fossil fuels that contribute to climate change ([link removed]) for years to come.


** Concentric Energy Advisors
------------------------------------------------------------

EEI attached a study claiming that utility customers have overpaid for renewable energy contracts under PURPA in its comments to FERC on the NOPR ([link removed]) . The study by Concentric Energy Advisors, whose client list is dominated by utilities ([link removed]) , was commissioned by EEI and released with some fanfare last month ([link removed]) .

John Weaver of PV Magazine wrote that the EEI-backed study ([link removed]) suffers from a “major sampling error” that likely accounts for the “overpayment” for solar contracts that Concentric Energy Advisors attributes to PURPA.


** Institute for Energy Research
------------------------------------------------------------

Travis Fisher, a FERC staffer who worked for the Institute for Energy Research before he joined the Trump administration ([link removed]) , participated in a session on “PURPA Reform” at an EEI External Affairs Conference last year ([link removed]) .

IER contributed another anti-PURPA study to the NOPR docket. IER has received funding from EEI ([link removed]) , as well as from coal producers like Cloud Peak Energy ([link removed]) and Peabody Energy ([link removed]) , and Koch foundations ([link removed]) .

IER attached to its NOPR comments ([link removed]) a study on “The Urgency of PURPA Reform to Assure Ratepayer Protection” by David Dismukes of the Center for Energy Studies at Louisiana State University.

“The author wishes to thank the Institute for Energy Research for financial assistance in conducting this research,” the study said.

The Center for Energy Studies has an Advisory Council ([link removed]) that includes representatives of major utilities like AEP, oil and gas companies like ExxonMobil, and Koch Industries.

Dismukes, who previously authored a misleading report attacking net metering rooftop solar in Louisiana ([link removed]) , also runs a consulting firm called Acadian Consulting whose clients ([link removed]) include electric and gas utilities.

IER recently teamed up with the coal industry on another misleading report attacking wind and solar power ([link removed]) .


** Consumer Energy Alliance
------------------------------------------------------------

Another comment in support of the NOPR ([link removed]) came from David Holt, president of the Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA) and managing partner for the lobbying firm HBW Resources that runs CEA.

“On behalf of our 550,000 individual members and nearly 300 member organizations, Consumer Energy Alliance (CEA) writes to express appreciation and support for the Commission’s determination to modernize its Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act (PURPA) regulations in a way that benefits the American energy consumer and family budgets,” Holt wrote.

Those member organizations ([link removed]) include many fossil fuel and utility interests, including EEI ([link removed]) .


** Americans for Tax Reform
------------------------------------------------------------

Americans for Tax Reform ([link removed]) , which has received $183,500 from EEI since 2013 ([link removed]) , referenced the EEI-backed study written by Concentric Energy Advisors in its comments to FERC on the NOPR.

Americans for Tax Reform claims that “PURPA creates unnecessary and burdensome costs on ratepayers and energy consumers.” Yet it receives funding from EEI, which many utility customers are forced to fund through hidden charges on their electricity bill ([link removed]) .

Based on this funding model, EEI’s president Thomas Kuhn raked in nearly $5.5 million in total compensation in 2018 ([link removed]) . EEI’s revenue totaled $90 million that year.

Some states are stepping up their oversight of utilities’ recovery of EEI dues from customers. Earlier this year, the California Public Utility Commission barred Southern California Edison from recovering any of its EEI dues ([link removed]) from customers.


** The U.S. Chamber of Commerce
------------------------------------------------------------

The U.S. Chamber, which has received $233,050 from EEI since 2012 ([link removed]) , also submitted comments supportive of the NOPR.

As with EEI, utilities like NextEra-subsidiary Florida Power & Light ([link removed]) have sought to recover their U.S. Chamber dues from customers.


** A former member of the Michigan Public Service Commission
------------------------------------------------------------

Another commenter supportive ([link removed]) of the NOPR was Steven A. Transeth, a former member ([link removed]) of the Michigan Public Service Commission (2007-2009). Transeth’s comments cited Concentric Energy Advisors’ study for EEI.

Transeth also attacked PURPA earlier this year. The Detroit News published his op-ed in April, ([link removed]) which was when the PSC was set to rule on Consumer Energy’s request to waive certain requirements ([link removed]) under PURPA. The PSC denied ([link removed]) the utility’s request, and then months later approved a settlement between solar developers and Consumers Energy that will place 584 MW of renewable energy projects under contract by September 1, 2023.

Transeth now has own consulting firm, Transeth & Associates, and he’s also the executive director of the Michigan Energy & Jobs Coalition, which counts DTE and Consumers Energy among its key members ([link removed]) . In 2012, Transeth worked with the DTE- and Consumers-backed Coalition for Affordable Renewable Energy ([link removed]) to defeat a Michigan ballot initiative requiring the utilities to get 25 percent of their power by 2025 ([link removed]) . In 2011, he represented ([link removed]) the Coalition for Fair Transmission Policy, which also included DTE and Consumers Energy as members, in criticizing FERC Order 1000 ([link removed]) .

The PURPA NOPR “…track with what both DTE and Consumers would want to see happen,” Transeth recently told the Energy News Network ([link removed]) .

Transeth also recently authored an opinion piece ([link removed]) in UtilityDive defending DTE’s long-term resource plan from criticism.


** … and Koch-backed groups
------------------------------------------------------------

A number of special interest groups that have received funding from foundations linked to Koch Industries also weighed in with comments in support of the NOPR, including Americans for Limited Government ([link removed]) , Center for Freedom & Prosperity ([link removed]) , Center for Growth and Opportunity ([link removed]) , Competitive Enterprise Institute ([link removed]) , National Tax Limitation Foundation ([link removed]) , and National Taxpayers Union ([link removed]) .

EEI is closely connected to the Koch network through its funding ([link removed]) of groups like Americans for Prosperity ([link removed]) , the American Legislative Exchange Council ([link removed]) , and the State Policy Network, where EEI has campaigned against net metering for rooftop solar ([link removed]) .

Top photo from Flickr by Kristian Buus ([link removed]) . Creative Commons License info ([link removed])

The post PURPA under attack by utilities and their front groups ([link removed]) appeared first on Energy and Policy Institute ([link removed]) .
Read in browser » ([link removed])
[link removed] [link removed]




** Recent Articles:
------------------------------------------------------------
** Georgia Power Inaction on Renewables May Lead to Loss of Large Industrial Customer ([link removed])
** National Grid Objected to Heat Pump Company’s Party Status in New Gas Pipeline Project ([link removed])
** An “Electric Cooperative Governance Task Force Report” urging co-op transparency was kept secret until now ([link removed])
** Report details utilities’ use of charitable giving to influence politics ([link removed])
** Entergy Threatens New Orleans City Council in Push Against “Resilient Renewables” ([link removed]

============================================================
** Facebook ([link removed])
** Twitter ([link removed])
** Website ([link removed])
Copyright © 2019 Energy and Policy Institute, All rights reserved.
You are receiving this email because you opted in at our website via our Contact Us page.

Our mailing address is:
Energy and Policy Institute
P.O. Box 170399
San Francisco, CA 94117
USA
Want to change how you receive these emails?
You can ** update your preferences ([link removed])
or ** unsubscribe from this list ([link removed])
.
Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp
[link removed]