It’s down to the wire in Maryland’s General Assembly for any bills still alive in the closing week of this year’s session. Any bill not passed by Midnight on April 11th is dead for the year. This is the time that a little extra effort can sway those legislators sitting on the fence about a bill. Check out the status of a few key energy bills and then take action by contacting your local legislator (if you live in Maryland, of course!).
HB 1054/SB 861 – Offshore Wind – This bill is the top priority of the Governor’s office as well as a slew of environmental groups, labor unions, and even some businesses. It would bring offshore wind to Maryland, reducing our dependence on fossil fuel powered energy sources, bringing green jobs to our state, and reducing the amount of electricity Maryland imports. The Senate has indicated that it will wait for the House to move first on this bill. The House Economic Matters Committee is deliberating the bill now and could vote as early as today (Thursday). The vote will be close and could be decided by one Delegate’s decision to support the bill or not.
The utility (ie. Pepco) reliability bills are still alive. Two of the bills have been killed in committee, but the main bill is making progress and could pass.
HB 391/Sb 692 – passed both houses with amendments. Senator Frosh Amendment rejected.
HB 391/SB 692 – The House version (HB 391, chief sponsor is Montgomery County Delegate Brian Feldman (D-15). Most of the other MoCo legislators are on board with this and it was a O’Malley Administration priority. The bill passed the House and now awaits action in the Senate. The Senate version is sponsored by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mac Middleton (D-Charles County). Many MoCo Senators are on board as well. The bill passed the Senate, though a great Amendment to not allow rate increases to pay for downed wires, by Sen. Brian Frosh (D-MoCo) failed. This bill would require Pepco and the other utilities to achieve certain minimum performance standards or face serious penalties from the Public Service Commission. The bill would strive to put Pepco and the other utilities at the top of the class, rather than the bottom, nationally. The next step is for each chamber to pass the other chamber’s version, or alternatively go to conference and agree to compromise on any differences.
The other utility reliability bills were killed in committee.
HB 1278 – which would have prevented Pepco and others from charging customers for time when the power is out died in committee, but did get favorable votes from MoCo Delegates – Hucker, Kramer, Barkley, Feldman, and by Committee Vice Chair, David Rudolph.
HB 1171/SB 749 – The other utility reliability bill died in the Senate Finance Committee, receiving no favorable votes from any Senator.
Another bill that died recently is HB 1123/SB 715 – a bill that would have required utilities to enter into long term contracts for Solar RECs. It was supported by the solar industry and the environmental community, but the Senate Finance Committee voted it down.
Finally, a bill that would allow garbage incineration to count as clean energy like wind and solar in Maryland’s Renewable Portfolio Standard is thankfully looking almost dead. The Senate version, SB 690, passed the Senate so quickly, the environmental community didn’t even have a chance to do any outreach to Senators about the bill. But the bill is now stuck in the House, looking like it will go nowhere after the environmental community and certain clean energy businesses let legislators know about the concerns with this piece.
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
Support Offshore Wind Power Testimony
The following is the testimony that Gary Skulnik will provide in support of Governor Martin O'Malley's bill to build offshore wind power off the Maryland coast.
On behalf of Clean Currents, a Rockville based clean energy marketer, I ask you to support HB 1054 with the attached amendments. The amendments we are offering address the following issues:
1.) Customers purchasing wind energy through electricity suppliers should be exempt from the surcharge.
2.) RECs should be sold to the voluntary market.
3.) Industrial ratepayers should share the burden with every other ratepayer.
Clean Currents is a unique energy marketer and we bring a very unique perspective to this important piece of legislation. We are the only energy marketer in Maryland that is exclusively focused on providing green power to our customers. We are the only energy marketer in Maryland that is certified as a B-Corp, a third party independent confirmation of our sustainable business operations. We are probably the only energy marketer in the state that is supporting this offshore wind energy bill. We support this bill because we know that we need to make a major energy transition in Maryland to address significant issues like clean air, climate change, in-state generation, and the creation of green jobs. The installation of offshore wind will do much to bring Maryland one step closer to a true clean energy future.
As an energy marketer, we believe in the benefit of the competitive market in Maryland. The competitive market benefits consumers and helps spur private sector growth. It also spurs innovative products and services that the traditional utilities are either too slow to adopt or unwilling to adopt. We do not believe that this bill will harm the competitive market in any meaningful way. It was written in a way that preserves the competitive market in Maryland.
We have three amendments we’d like to propose. We hope that the first two would be considered friendly amendments by the bill’s sponsors and supporters.
1. Marylanders who are purchasing wind energy through competitive electricity suppliers should be exempt from any surcharge for offshore wind.
It’s an issue of fairness, first and foremost. If a resident or business is already doing their part to support the creation of new clean energy generation, they should not be asked to pay twice. Also, if this amendment is not adopted, the bill may have the unintended consequence of depressing the voluntary clean energy market. I do not believe this is the intent of the bill’s sponsors. If consumers believe they would be paying for wind twice, they are less likely to switch to a wind energy product provided by a competitive energy supplier. Our ability to grow market share would be harmed if this amendment is not adopted.
There would be some implementation issues to resolve if this amendment is adopted, but they should not be overly difficult. Montgomery County managed to track clean energy purchases in conjunction with competitive energy suppliers and the utilities through its Clean Energy Rewards Program. The Public Service Commission could simply follow that model.
2. RECs should be allowed to be sold to whoever wants to buy them.
The current language in the bill requires the utilities to sell the RECs from the offshore wind projects to entities that will use them for compliance with the Maryland RPS. But what if a company like Clean Currents or others wants to buy additional RECs to sell to Marylanders as a “Maryland Wind” product? That should not be prohibited. In fact, if REC sales are opened up to any buyer, thus increasing the demand side, the price of these RECs is likely to go up, which will help keep the costs of the offshore wind to consumers down.
3. Industrial ratepayers should not be exempt from the surcharge at any level of usage.
The workers at large steel plants or other manufacturers stand the most to gain from the jobs associated with offshore wind production. In fact, the wind turbines used to produce offshore wind power have to be manufactured close to the place they would be used, so they cannot be made in China or India. They will almost certainly be made in Maryland or somewhere close. If the manufacturers are thus benefiting from this bill, they should share the cost of the bill with all the other ratepayers. This will help bring down the cost to the other ratepayers and would be the most fair thing to do.
In conclusion, Clean Currents has been proud to be actively supporting offshore wind for Maryland. We have helped get petitions signed, publicize events, and supported the lobbying efforts of the environmental advocacy groups. We ask you to give HB 1054 a FAVORABLE report with the amendments we are proposing.
On behalf of Clean Currents, a Rockville based clean energy marketer, I ask you to support HB 1054 with the attached amendments. The amendments we are offering address the following issues:
1.) Customers purchasing wind energy through electricity suppliers should be exempt from the surcharge.
2.) RECs should be sold to the voluntary market.
3.) Industrial ratepayers should share the burden with every other ratepayer.
Clean Currents is a unique energy marketer and we bring a very unique perspective to this important piece of legislation. We are the only energy marketer in Maryland that is exclusively focused on providing green power to our customers. We are the only energy marketer in Maryland that is certified as a B-Corp, a third party independent confirmation of our sustainable business operations. We are probably the only energy marketer in the state that is supporting this offshore wind energy bill. We support this bill because we know that we need to make a major energy transition in Maryland to address significant issues like clean air, climate change, in-state generation, and the creation of green jobs. The installation of offshore wind will do much to bring Maryland one step closer to a true clean energy future.
As an energy marketer, we believe in the benefit of the competitive market in Maryland. The competitive market benefits consumers and helps spur private sector growth. It also spurs innovative products and services that the traditional utilities are either too slow to adopt or unwilling to adopt. We do not believe that this bill will harm the competitive market in any meaningful way. It was written in a way that preserves the competitive market in Maryland.
We have three amendments we’d like to propose. We hope that the first two would be considered friendly amendments by the bill’s sponsors and supporters.
1. Marylanders who are purchasing wind energy through competitive electricity suppliers should be exempt from any surcharge for offshore wind.
It’s an issue of fairness, first and foremost. If a resident or business is already doing their part to support the creation of new clean energy generation, they should not be asked to pay twice. Also, if this amendment is not adopted, the bill may have the unintended consequence of depressing the voluntary clean energy market. I do not believe this is the intent of the bill’s sponsors. If consumers believe they would be paying for wind twice, they are less likely to switch to a wind energy product provided by a competitive energy supplier. Our ability to grow market share would be harmed if this amendment is not adopted.
There would be some implementation issues to resolve if this amendment is adopted, but they should not be overly difficult. Montgomery County managed to track clean energy purchases in conjunction with competitive energy suppliers and the utilities through its Clean Energy Rewards Program. The Public Service Commission could simply follow that model.
2. RECs should be allowed to be sold to whoever wants to buy them.
The current language in the bill requires the utilities to sell the RECs from the offshore wind projects to entities that will use them for compliance with the Maryland RPS. But what if a company like Clean Currents or others wants to buy additional RECs to sell to Marylanders as a “Maryland Wind” product? That should not be prohibited. In fact, if REC sales are opened up to any buyer, thus increasing the demand side, the price of these RECs is likely to go up, which will help keep the costs of the offshore wind to consumers down.
3. Industrial ratepayers should not be exempt from the surcharge at any level of usage.
The workers at large steel plants or other manufacturers stand the most to gain from the jobs associated with offshore wind production. In fact, the wind turbines used to produce offshore wind power have to be manufactured close to the place they would be used, so they cannot be made in China or India. They will almost certainly be made in Maryland or somewhere close. If the manufacturers are thus benefiting from this bill, they should share the cost of the bill with all the other ratepayers. This will help bring down the cost to the other ratepayers and would be the most fair thing to do.
In conclusion, Clean Currents has been proud to be actively supporting offshore wind for Maryland. We have helped get petitions signed, publicize events, and supported the lobbying efforts of the environmental advocacy groups. We ask you to give HB 1054 a FAVORABLE report with the amendments we are proposing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)