39 Days Later: From "Reliable Energy Source" to 18% Price Hike

By: TheGreenMiles
Published On: 5/8/2008 10:31:10 AM

39 days ago:

"The sustainability of our economic development successes are dependent on having a reliable energy source," said Delacey Skinner, [Gov. Kaine's] communications director.

Yesterday:

Dominion Virginia Power announced yesterday that it would seek permission to raise electricity rates 18 percent this summer to make customers pay for part of the increased cost of coal and other fuels.

The request, if approved, would raise the average monthly bill from about $91 to about $107, Dominion officials said.

What's sustainable and reliable about an energy source with soaring costs, dwindling availablility, and increasing need for importation? Why aren't we investing in energy efficiency, by far the cheapest and easiest way to make our usage more in line with our capacity, and renewable energy, which keeps coming down in cost?

Oh, right. Because our system is set up so that Dominion's profits aren't set up to make the best use of our resources, but to sell us the most energy at the highest price. Will any of our elected officials take the lead to decouple Dominion's profits from the amount of coal it burns and instead give them incentives to be efficient?


Comments



I'm with you on this one (Silence Dogood - 5/8/2008 10:59:22 AM)
If they didn't want to be at the mercy of fuel costs, they should have diverisified how they were generating resources to include more renewable energy sources.  Perhaps higher utility rates will at least encourage more consumers to reduce their energy use and make things like solar panels look not quite so expensive by comparison.


"Counter-pander" on energy (Lowell - 5/8/2008 12:06:34 PM)
Speaking of energy, I agree with this analysis almost 100%.

Obama showed last week how you can offer a serious alternative to political gimmicks and be rewarded for it. It appears his Senate colleagues didn't learn the lesson. The bill they threw together is a lame piece of pandering, just as silly in its own way as the McCain/Clinton gas tax holiday.

I'll get into the details below, but the main problem is not in the details, it's in the three underlying premises:

   * High gas prices are attributable to short-term market quirks and oil industry perfidy;
   * it is possible for Congress to meaningfully lower the prices of gas; and
   * low gas prices are a proper target for public policy.

Each of these premises is false. Oil prices are rising because production is flat and demand is rising. Production is going to stay flat, or decline. Demand is going to keep rising. Ergo, gas prices are going to keep rising. So in the unlikely event the bill is passed, it would address a problem that's not really a problem, which couldn't be solved if it were a problem, in a way that does not address the real causes of the problem-that's-not-a-problem. Quite the legislative trifecta!

The "legislative trifecta" is right.  Frankly, the only good thing I have to say about the Democratic plan is that the Republican plan -- the Drill, Drill, Drill Bill -- is even worse.