Western Resource Advocates (WRA), the multi-state renewable energy advocacy group, also seems to be an advocacy group for electricity corporate oligarchies.
Two weeks ago, in what looks to be Xcel Energy’s bidding, the group filed a motion to strike a huge portion of our expert witness Charles Griffey’s testimony that completely disproves WRA and Xcel’s claim that the Colorado Energy Plan (CEP) will save money for ratepayers. Fortunately, the PUC disagreed with WRA and denied its motion.
Xcel is a Minneapolis-based monopoly with its top ten stockholders being Wall Street banks and investment funds.
Last Friday, WRA came out opposed to Nevada’s consumer choice ballot measure. According to a joint press release with the Sierra Club, Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), and Southwest Energy Efficiency Project (SWEEP), WRA said:
NV Energy has changed course on renewable energy and is proposing new solar projects that will double its current level of renewable generation by 2023. By taking NV Energy out of the electricity generation business at this critical juncture, passage of Question 3 not only will kill these important projects, but it is likely to create a cloud of legal and regulatory uncertainty that could chill the development of new renewable projects by anyone else over the next 4-5 years while the Legislature figures out the complicated details of restructuring Nevada’s electricity markets. We urge Nevadans to vote No on Question 3.
Translation: Regulators must require utilities to use expensive, intermittent sources, make captive ratepayers pay the price “at any cost” and unjustly enrich stockholders. (NV Energy is “a wholly-owned subsidiary of Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company.”) Absent regulations and mandates, consumers may not choose wind and solar on their own. Why? Because they are expensive and aren’t always available when we really them.
Interestingly, the Sierra Club, EDF, and SWEEP joined WRA in support Xcel’s CEP. This is how Intermountain Rural Electric Association described that support: “the stipulating parties’ fixation on retiring 650 MW of economic coal generation a decade ahead of schedule and at any cost has been a deeply flawed proposal from the outset.” [emphasis mine]
At any cost…these groups use environmental activism to enrich corporate oligarchies. They’ve gone from tree huggers to money grabbers all in the name of environmentalism.
