Where We Live: Explaining Connecticut's Energy Bill
Supporters say electric costs to come down 15% by 2012
The sweeping energy reform bill passed by the Connecticut General Assembly just over a week ago is on its way to Governor Rell’s desk. Will she veto it?
Proponents of the bill say it is a collection of many smaller pieces of legislation from earlier this year, aimed at regulating retailers, bringing down energy costs and promoting the use of renewables. Opponents say the bill was crafted behind closed doors and that it won’t do anything to substantially contain energy costs.
Today, we contine a series of conversations we’ve been having about energy. We’ll talk with co-chairs of the General Assembly’s Energy and Technology Committee about what’s in this new bill, the process they used to pass it, and the likelihood of the bill becoming Connecticut Law.
Send to friend
Printer-friendly version
The status quo is unacceptable. We have some of the highest rates in the country. How can we be happy with that?
Comments
renewable energy
Long term investment of states vs short returns on renewables, to reduce expenses on power is a need. Can we reduce costs to implement new "Power Ranger" program to build alt. resources install on private homes and public bldgs.: increase private use of solar, wind and geothermal power, increase off the grid power as a national resource, like our National forests. Green power to become a national resource. Our nation's debt can foster an alternative job in a new forest, Power Ranger's in a National Forest to employ another type of Eco-Ranger. Private homeowners and public land foresters can create off the grid 'cells', to initiate and upload power for an open resource in public funded bid to change the use of power in this independent democratic republic. fritsolsen@gmail.com
Robert from West Hartford
This is Robert from West Hartford, I called in today. I'm fairly happy I took my answer off the air because both Representatives dodged their respective questions and I would have only interrupted them and sounded bad. I still do not know of any other legislation cobbled together like this in the last days of a session that supposedly had hearings on all of its parts. In addition, isn't it possible that now that they these parts are put together their outcome is different and would require new public comment?
Furthermore, how can we offer breaks to low income households without somehow paying for it? Who is paying for it then?
I should say, I'm not necessarily opposed to the bill in any regard, but I am opposed to being lied to by those who are supposed to represent us.
Listener email from Nancy
I am very concerned about the close relationship between lobbyists and DPUC commissioners. Before any rate increase is considered I would like to see published the salaries and benefits of the top 10 executives. Then we can discuss rate increases.
Listener email from Gary
When the utilities increase the generation rates, I see this as their wanting to get out of the generation argument.
They can make their profits if they let others supply the energy and just charge the delivery rates.
Listener email from Matthew
I'm from Sen. Fonfara's 1st district and he knows of the districts accomplishments in this area. Could your guests comment on the comprehensive approach of the bill to improve Connecticut's energy future. How might this bill effect the work of municipalities and energy committees? How would it challenge the citizens to become involved in our energy future or give them the tools to become more sustainable in their own households?
Listener email from Bill
If our leaders in HTFD can’t keep their hands off of money tagged for renewable generation in the State through the CCEF- how is the new moneys tagged for renewable generation safe?
Listener email from Joyce #2
Thanks for asking my question on the air today (and for a great follow-up question). In listening to the responses from Sen. Fonfara and Rep. Nardello to my question and the question following mine, it became clear that there was confusion between the Connecticut Clean Energy Fund and Connecticut Energy Efficiency Fund--and what the Efficiency Fund actually does. Further, despite their defenses of the efficiency fund (the clean energy fund was actually spared), both Sen. Fonfara and Rep. Nardello voted for the budget that raided the funds.
I think it's fabulous that you've had members of the media and state government, and leaders of utility companies to talk about the potential change in energy policy in the State. The fund raid is a huge change in energy policy, and I hope you'll consider doing a show talking to the leaders of the Energy Conservation Management Board (they're the ones who actually advise and approve programs for the efficiency fund), Connecticut Energy Advisory Board (a stakeholder board created by statute), DPUC, DEP, etc.
Listener email from Joyce
A question for Sen. Fonfara and Rep. Nardello-
While you are trying to get the governor to pass this bill, what are you doing to try to reverse the tragic raid on efficiency funds that will take 35%, or $28.7 million, per year for 8 years? Efficiency funds support energy efficiency projects that increase jobs--even more than renewables do--increase the GSP, decrease emissions, and reduce the amount of renewables that are needed to reach the RPS that Rep. Nardello just described. All of this means that efficiency is the cheapest, most effective way to reduce ratepayer BILLS, not just rates.
Listener email from Don
I am in the commercial electric and natural gas aggregation business and everyone knows renewable energy is MORE expensive than even CT's very high rates.
How will mandates for renewable energy infrastructure in CT lower our rates?
Post new comment