Francis Menton and two colleagues regarding a request by Con Edison, a local electric utility, for a rate increase. This objection highlights concerns over the utility's push for new infrastructure investment aimed at supporting New York State's climate change initiatives, particularly in light of the current electricity generation realities.
1. Background on Con Edison:
• Con Edison has shifted away from generating electricity after deregulation in the 1990s, focusing instead on electricity delivery.
• Their request for a rate increase is tied to plans for new infrastructure to support the electrification of buildings and vehicles as part of New York’s goal to achieve "net zero" greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
2. Concerns Over Electrification:
• A significant portion of Con Edison’s power comes from natural gas, which means that electrifying buildings and vehicles may not effectively reduce GHG emissions and could potentially increase them.
• New York's plans for zero-emissions electricity generation are stalled, with failed offshore and onshore wind projects contributing to this issue.
3. Opposition to the Rate Increase:
• Menton, along with his colleagues, argues that the proposed spending for new infrastructure is unnecessary and could lead to higher electricity costs for consumers.
• They suggest that the current push for electrification isn’t supported by a sufficient supply of zero-emission electricity.
4. Regulatory Proceedings:
• The objection was filed as part of an ongoing rate proceeding where Con Edison initially requested a 10% increase per year for the years 2026-2028.
• Following negotiations, this request has been reduced to about 3% per year, but concerns remain regarding how much of this spending ties to climate initiatives rather than system reliability.
5. Key Excerpts from the Objection:
• Menton outlined specific objections, highlighting that the proposed plans do not align with the actual availability of electricity and that ratepayer funds should not be used for goals deemed infeasible.
6. Conclusion of the Objection:
• The objection emphasizes that the Joint Proposal (JP) calling for these increases is unjust and contrary to the public interest by imposing costs associated with impractical goals while obscuring the actual funding needed for reliable service.
The blog post serves as a platform for raising concerns over Con Edison’s request for a rate increase and the broader implications of New York State’s climate initiatives. It critiques the current trajectory of spending by the utility and urges a focus on practical energy generation and delivery solutions, rather than unachievable climate targets.
No comments:
Post a Comment