Call Progress, Make Your Voice Heard

A statement from NC WARN Executive Director Jim Warren www.ncwarn.org

DURHAM, NC – NC WARN today filed a motion with the NC Utilities Commission seeking postponement of Duke Energy’s application for two coal-fired power plants. In light of the many initiatives currently underway to develop energy efficiency programs, and the sheer cost of building more old-style, polluting coal boilers near Charlotte, the Commission should not begin considering the “public convenience and necessity” of Duke’s plan until it examines the real potential of sustainable alternatives. Such programs – if administered in the public interest by a qualified party – could displace the need for new generation units for far less than the $2 billion projected for Duke’s new plant at the Cliffside site.

Since announcing the need for new coal-fired and nuclear power plants last year, both Duke Energy and Progress Energy have drawn much criticism for ignoring energy efficiency and clean generation technologies. In response, both have deployed aggressive public relations campaigns claiming they really do support efficiency and renewables, with programs in place to prove it. Duke CEO Jim Rogers even sits as co-chair of a much-heralded national task force on energy efficiency.

However, at Commission hearings in June regarding long-range planning for energy supply and demand, it was clear that neither Duke nor Progress have any substantial programs underway – or imminent – that actually save energy (they do use limited Demand Side Management programs that shift peak usage). Both announced they have begun extensive reviews of scores of efficiency programs used in other states to determine if some could work well here. Neither company would say when those reviews would be complete, or whether they would be done in time to consider the potential offset to their much-asserted need for new generation capacity.

It seemed apparent that both companies were simply going through the motions, pretending to be considering sustainability. Further confirming that suspicion is Duke’s pressing ahead for the two-billion dollar coal-burners in Cleveland County, instead of awaiting the results of its own efficiency assessment. And Duke and Progress opposed legislation to create an energy efficiency study and funding for the NC Energy Office. Let’s face it: Cutting energy demand runs counter to the utilities’ justification for new plants and desire for maximum revenue.

Duke’s energy planning reports (IRPs) don’t compare what that $2 billion could fund in energy efficiency programs. But case law shows that the purpose of the Commission’s IRP statute is to prevent costly overbuilding. Resolution of various issues under consideration by the Commission, including modernization of the long-range planning process, ratemaking issues, carbon dioxide regulation, renewable portfolio standards and public benefit funds, will have a significant impact on any determination of the need for these plants.

The utilities’ lack of experience with clean, efficient technologies is another reason that a third party such as the NC Energy Office or Advanced Energy – agencies with demonstrated expertise – should administer a comprehensive, statewide efficiency program. The Utilities Commission must fully consider efficiency before allowing billions of public dollars to be committed toward old, hazardous technologies that squander the time and resources urgently needed to cut greenhouse gases.