 | ||
 | | |
 | ||
| | |
 | ||
| | |
Wild Life / volume 12 number 5, May 2010 Power and Money: Wind energy, long a dream for the Interior, may soon be reality. It is part of a three-part plan to reduce energy costs, according to Golden Valley Electric Association (GVEA). GVEA proposes creating the Eva Creek wind project, restarting the Healy 2 coal-fired power plant, and purchasing natural gas trucked to Fairbanks from the North Slope. These projects seem to provide diverse energy sources that may stabilize costs. However, funding three new generation projects may not be the smartest way to lower anyone’s energy bills. The most bang for your buck? Energy efficiency. First, let’s look at the options on the table. Just outside Healy, the Eva Creek wind project is the cleanest energy source in the mix. This is a great way to diversify 24 megawatts in GVEA’s energy mix. Financial incentives make the project appealing to GVEA, such as using federal economic stimulus money to buy down the interest rate while any interest earned on the loans can be used to offset the costs. Eva Creek is appealing to ratepayers who want wind energy to provide a reliable power source. Eva Creek wind farm will help GVEA reach its “Green Power Pledge” of 20 percent renewable energy by 2014. One of the reasons for the Green Power Pledge is to combat the most polluting fossil fuel, coal. GVEA could be Alaska’s greenest co-op, but only if it gets serious about the problems associated with coal-fired power plants. The benefits of a renewable wind project will be canceled out if GVEA does not reconsider the use of coal in the Interior’s energy future. Healy 2 would add 50 megawatts of coal-fired power, which would offset any strides made to reach the pledge. The Healy 2 coal plant has been a black hole for $312 million already, and now the State of Alaska hopes to lend GVEA $95 million more to get this failed technological experiment off its hands. Healy 2 has twenty-year-old technology that never worked in the first place. From design flaws to mismanagement, no Alaska entity is qualified to run Healy 2—as proof of this, consider that GVEA has spent $10 million in legal fees against the state over the past ten years. Retrofits to meet current and future pollution standards will be pricey. Just last week EPA passed tighter regulations on mercury emissions, and anticipated climate legislation will require significant CO2 reductions from power plants. A $95 million loan may be only the beginning; it is projected that the final price tag will be over $400 million. Almost one-half billion dollars for a polluting white elephant that ratepayers will have to pay for! Wind energy avoids the pollution issues, but it will still cost $93 million. The natural gas project will moderate the problems associated with electric generation. With both wind and natural gas projects within reach, why would GVEA look to restart a failed twenty-two-year-old experiment? One has to question GVEA’s ability to prioritize projects if it is planning three new generation projects without even addressing energy efficiency in its model to lower everyone’s monthly bills. Regardless of which projects get the “go ahead,” the reality is that energy efficiency can save on electricity the most quickly. A report released earlier this year, REEL in Alaska Roadmap, found that if all the utilities in the Railbelt commit to electric efficiency gains, by 2025 we would need 50 percent less electricity generation than we used in 2000. GVEA can be a leader in this. Energy efficiency does not mean freezing in the dark; it means using better technology that wastes less energy. We would actually save money without having to turn off the lights. Energy efficiency is something Alaska needs now and is already happening. This year the state passed a bill to make public buildings become more efficient, which saves public dollars in the long term. GVEA should be promoting projects for energy efficiency above all else, and it can do this by using more efficient powerlines and retrofitting generation projects. Instead, GVEA is placing these three other ideas on the table without addressing the basic idea of getting more energy for less money, through energy efficiency. Electricity comes with the flick of a switch. We heat our homes and we power our businesses all with some buttons and wires. Those wires connect to a few different options, two being a coal-fired power plant or a wind turbine generation station. Both ways let us live our lives, but one way lets us breathe easier. And once we step back, we can address the bigger question of how much energy we are wasting just because we are depending on old technology. Nancy Kuhn is a member of the GVEA Ratepayers' Alliance. More about the Alliance can be found at www.savegvea.com and www.responsibleratepayers.com. | ||
| | |
